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.