Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 14 Beta!!

[Philip Rhoades]

Andre,
> Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 09:37:54 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Andre Robatino
> Subject: Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 14 Beta!!
> To: [e-mail]
> Message-ID:
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Philip Rhoades<phil<at>  pricom.com.au>  writes:
> > Fedora-14-Beta-i686-Live-XFCE.iso has the same cksum as Beta RC3?
>
> Beta is identical to Beta RC3. In general, for each of Alpha, Beta, and Final,
> one of the corresponding release candidates is chosen (usually, but not
> necessarily, the last one). You can verify this by comparing the unsigned
> checksum files for Beta RC3 with the corresponding signed ones for Beta. The
> only difference is the signature.

Isn't that an odd thing to do?  I would have thought that the point of 
having different pre-final release versions, including release 
candidates, is to progressively improve the version ie reduce bugs - as 
it gets closer to a final release?

Thanks for the info though . .

Phil.

Announcing the release of Fedora 14 Beta!!

[Gordon Messmer]

On 09/29/2010 08:03 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote:
> Isn't that an odd thing to do?  I would have thought that the point of
> having different pre-final release versions, including release
> candidates, is to progressively improve the version ie reduce bugs - as
> it gets closer to a final release?

It's a common practice.  The name "release candidate" indicates that the 
package is deemed potentially suitable for release.  Testers check the 
RC for bugs that should block the release.  If any are found, those are 
fixed and a new RC is tested.  When no blocking bugs are found, the 
release candidate is published as the release.  If changes were made 
after the last RC, they'd be published without testing.  That would be 
bad. :)