Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Developing U++ » Releasing U++ » I believe we need rc2, right?
I believe we need rc2, right? [message #16410] Fri, 13 June 2008 10:06 Go to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
I am afraid there were minor but serious troubles with rc1...

Mirek
Re: I believe we need rc2, right? [message #16411 is a reply to message #16410] Fri, 13 June 2008 10:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
P.S.: I really do think that if possible, rcs should be IDENTICAL to final, except the file name. So the final should be obtained by renaming rc.
Re: I believe we need rc2, right? [message #16414 is a reply to message #16411] Fri, 13 June 2008 10:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
masu is currently offline  masu
Messages: 378
Registered: February 2006
Senior Member
I very much agree Wink.

Matthias
Re: I believe we need rc2, right? [message #16425 is a reply to message #16411] Sat, 14 June 2008 00:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1259
Registered: September 2007
Senior Contributor
luzr wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 10:07

P.S.: I really do think that if possible, rcs should be IDENTICAL to final, except the file name. So the final should be obtained by renaming rc.


uhmmm... that poses some problems on debian.
Well... not the file name (I think, not tested...) but the internal version name, because of debian version ordering.

The '0pre' added in front of latest rc1 was needed because otherwise debian package manager thinks that

2008.1-rc1 is NEWER than 2008.1

refusing so to install the release package.
Adding '0pre-' solves it because debian says that

0pre-2008.xxxxxxx is OLDER than 2008.xxxxx

because of leading 0. Nicer solutions are welcome....

OTOH, if you meant "identical in content", I agree with you, there should be just minor bugfixes between rc and finals.
But, I don't agree too much leaving RCx out of version/splash screen...

Max

[Updated on: Sat, 14 June 2008 00:08]

Report message to a moderator

Re: I believe we need rc2, right? [message #16427 is a reply to message #16410] Sat, 14 June 2008 03:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Novo is currently offline  Novo
Messages: 890
Registered: December 2006
Experienced Contributor
luzr wrote on Fri, 13 June 2008 04:06

I am afraid there were minor but serious troubles with rc1...

Mirek


I've spotted two problems:

http://www.ultimatepp.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=3549& amp;start=0& - can fix myself.
http://www.ultimatepp.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=3551& amp;start=0& - do not know how to fix at the moment.


Regards,
Novo
Re: I believe we need rc2, right? [message #16571 is a reply to message #16427] Fri, 27 June 2008 19:53 Go to previous message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
Well, I think we are +/- OK now (I will try to look into Vista OpenGL issue over weekend).

Therefore let us try rc2 in the next week!

Mirek
Previous Topic: Mingw
Next Topic: rc2
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Nov 18 03:02:29 CET 2019

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03768 seconds