Recommended Posts

No. Unless a showstopper forces a respin (which is extremely unlikely at this point), the June 24 build (RC3) is the Final build. As I've said before in another thread, Mozilla does true candidates, which is why none of the RCs contain "RC" in the version info.

The tree has long been closed, and all checkins since June 24 have been things that are not a part of the build. The nightlies are automatically spun every day, regardless of whether there has been any changes to the code, and they will continue to be automatically generated every day after 3.5 is released (at which point, they will be 3.5.1pre).

Edited by code.kliu.org
As I've said before in another thread, Mozilla does true candidates, which is why none of the RCs contain "RC" in the version info.
Which is interesting in the world of software development. I was ridiculed on another thread for pointing out that Mozilla's release candidates are truly candidates for release, unlike other software, like say Windows, where release candidates have absolutely zero chance of being final.
Which is interesting in the world of software development. I was ridiculed on another thread for pointing out that Mozilla's release candidates are truly candidates for release, unlike other software, like say Windows, where release candidates have absolutely zero chance of being final.

It's a bit like comparing apples and oranges though isn't it? Although I see your point.

Which is interesting in the world of software development. I was ridiculed on another thread for pointing out that Mozilla's release candidates are truly candidates for release, unlike other software, like say Windows, where release candidates have absolutely zero chance of being final.

You're right. With Windows, they generally pre-announce how many release candidates there will be. That, by the very definition of the term 'release candidate', means that they are not release candidates at all. How can RC1 be called a Candidate for Release if you've already announced there will be an RC2 long before RC1 came out. It's stupid really.

Microsoft should continue with the Beta tag until they are at the quality bar where the product could be released. At that point you compile a build and called it RC1. Assuming no show stoppers are found by the public in RC1, you use that very same build and rename it to Final. If bugs are found, you fix them and release a second RC. It's a no-brainer really.

Mozilla seems to do it this way which is a welcome change from Microsoft's backwards way of doing it.

Thanks, but I'll wait for the final version. :)

Which, from the looks of it, will almost certainly be bit-for-bit identical to RC3. ;)

For Mozilla, the process can vary. As people would recall, the Firefox 1.0 RCs were really glorified betas and were not true candidates. The current project drivers very much like the idea of a true RC (in part because it makes it easier for QA to sign off on things: if you spin a new build after an RC, you need to test that build anyway to make sure something weird didn't happen during build or packaging, etc.).

As for Microsoft, they have intentionally "grade-inflated", and they have a very good reason to do so. Raymond Chen wrote an article explaining this (sorry, don't have the link handy) that basically boiled down to this: Microsoft had a problem where people didn't pay attention to the betas, and there was one incident, back when Microsoft's RCs were true candidates that they got an important piece of feedback only after the RC came out, at which point it was too late in the process to make those sorts of changes without incurring a lot of extra cost. So they had to grade-inflate, and what used to be late betas are now RCs, and what used to be RCs are now escrow builds. The idea is that more people are more willing to test and give feedback if it says "RC" than if it says "beta". Though I think that with the current overuse of the "beta" label (e.g., Google's notorious perpetual betas), the need for this grade inflation has decreased somewhat in recent years.

You're right. With Windows, they generally pre-announce how many release candidates there will be. That, by the very definition of the term 'release candidate', means that they are not release candidates at all. How can RC1 be called a Candidate for Release if you've already announced there will be an RC2 long before RC1 came out. It's stupid really.

Microsoft should continue with the Beta tag until they are at the quality bar where the product could be released. At that point you compile a build and called it RC1. Assuming no show stoppers are found by the public in RC1, you use that very same build and rename it to Final. If bugs are found, you fix them and release a second RC. It's a no-brainer really.

Mozilla seems to do it this way which is a welcome change from Microsoft's backwards way of doing it.

I agree. I never understood Microsoft's way of doing this. It really doesn't make any sense at all.

Perhaps. It's only a day away, anyway. I think I can hold out with version 3.0.11 until the version 3.5 is released. :p

Yeah, I really can't wait. I still think that the Tab Previews they chose would have been better served if they used Showcase Tab as a base instead of the add in they chose, but that's my only gripe, and is admittedly miner. Showcase though is an AMAZING add in though.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • According to Microsoft, Cause: One of the drivers controlling the device notified the operating system that the device failed in some manner.   https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/error-codes-in-device-manager-in-windows-524e9e89-4dee-8883-0afa-6bca0456324e
    • This looks awesome, I will request access via Steam later this afternoon!
    • Personally, I’ve found that it’s usually worth investing in the infrastructure you don’t want to replace later, especially cabling. Running Cat6A (or better, depending on your needs) during an upgrade is relatively inexpensive compared to having to re-cable a few years down the road. For switches I try to balance current specs with realistic growth. If my budget allows it Ill choose switches with higher uplink speeds which leaves room for expanding later on, but I don’t necessarily overspend on access ports if the endpoints won’t benefit from them anytime soon. One lesson I’ve learned is that planning for scalability pays off. It’s much easier to add devices, VLANs, or higher-bandwidth workloads when your network infrastructure already supports it than to replace hardware later.  What is your budget like?
    • I hate the term, "future-proof." We saw it back in the 90's / 2000's, if not before. You cannot future-proof anything, since there is no definition of how far into the future you plan on prepping for. Best idea is to tell us what you currently have and what its use is at the moment, and we can then offer ideas about some areas that might need an upgrade and other areas that can be left alone.
    • I can agree that it is being used in a small capacity. I worked for a company where their engineers still used XP, and when asked why it was because their sensor software wasn't compatible with newer operating systems and the software was discontinued so they couldn't upgrade the software. Given that the sensors were still in use by companies, they had to continue using XP to support the sensor, otherwise the price to the company would have gone into the millions or billions. Our response was simple: Ok, you can keep the XP machine. But we're removing it from the network. "But then it can't access the Internet or folder shares!" Yup, kinda the point. If someone wants to continue using an unsecure OS they can do, I have no problem with that. But it should be isolated. Simple. I had a fight with a guy in the engineering department for weeks before he finally relented. But we digress.   What do I plan on doing to commemorate the anniversary? Nothing. I have fond memories of the OS, but at the end of the day it's just an OS. If I had some time I might see if I could install it on my Raspberry Pi for a laugh. But my reflex memory with today's OS ideas would probably get me frustrated and I'd uninstall it after 5 mins.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      539
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      269
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      154
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      99
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!