On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 16:05 -0700, Kenneth Porter wrote:
--On Friday, March 30, 2007 3:24 PM -0700 Frank Cusack fcusack@fcusack.com wrote:
This is why I'm still using 0.99. The RC's still look like betas and I have no idea which one (if any) is less a regression than any other.
They ARE betas. That's no reason to stay with 0.99. It's effectively beta as well.
In principle, a "release candidate" should be a gamma. It should be effectively ready for release, and distributed to check for awful show-stoppers.
Is 1.0rc29 stable enough to replace 0.99 from Fedora? Will I suddenly have a bunch of angry users seeing things break?
It is stable enough. I've been using it in production, and each RC, with no issues. Really damn good software.
1.0.rc1 was released in June. Here's a quote from the release message for rc11 (November 4):
Hopefully the last RC release? As far as I know there are no major problems left now. If nothing big shows up, v1.0 should be out in a couple of weeks.
In rc27:
A few new small features and lots of index/mbox fixes. I've been heavily stress testing this release, so I think it should be about perfect. :)
*Features*?! In an rc?! No wonder there's no convergence.
Oddly, the new features don't seem to act up. Just little issues keep coming up.