180
submitted 10 months ago by markus99@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 26 points 10 months ago

Not sure if it's still the same as it was back in my day, but KDE's "release candidate" nomenclature was always a bit of a misnomer. You'd never see RC1 actually released as final. What it really means is that the alpha "feature refinement" beta "bug fixing" phase is over, and it's the final testing phase for showstoppers. However, the definition of showstopper seemed always to be very wide. Thus, a lot of bugs still get reported and fixed during this phase, and RC really means "beta, but towards the end of the pipeline".

Which is in contrast to the Linux kernel where a RC can be declared ship-ready and simply get renamed.

Admittedly there's a fairly large impact difference between kernel level bugs, and say a bug in Okular...

[-] simple@lemm.ee 24 points 10 months ago

The nomenclature is actually correct here, and a lot of other software use it, at least from everything I've seen. Release candidate means it's stable and (usually) feature complete but could have bugs and needs testing before they launch it.

Prototype --> Alpha --> Beta --> Release Candidate --> Release

[-] hersh@literature.cafe 8 points 10 months ago

This is correct, albeit not universal.

KDE has a predefined schedule for "release candidates", which includes RC2 later this month. So "RC1" is clearly not going to be the final version. See: https://community.kde.org/Schedules/February_2024_MegaRelease

This is at least somewhat common. In fact, it's the same way the Linux kernel development cycle works. They have 7 release candidates, released on a weekly basis between the beta period and final release. See: https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html

In the world of proprietary corporate software, I more often see release candidates presented as potentially final; i.e. literal candidates for release. The idea of scheduling multiple RCs in advance doesn't make sense in that context, since each one is intended to be the last (with fingers crossed).

It's kind of splitting hairs, honestly, and I suspect this distinction has more to do with the transparency of open-source projects than anything else. Apple, for example, may indeed have a schedule for multiple macOS RCs right from the start and simply choose not to share that information. They present every "release candidate" as being potentially the final version (and indeed, the final version will be the same build as the final RC), but in practice there's always more than one. Also, Apple is hardly an ideal example to follow, since they've apparently never even heard of semantic version numbering. Major compatibility-breaking changes are often introduced in minor point releases. It's infuriating. But I digress.

[-] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago

If you're as old as I am, you'll recall software using the term "gamma" release instead of "release candidate" for that phase. ;)

[-] Oisteink@feddit.nl -5 points 10 months ago

It’s still a misuse of the word - if your software needs testing it’s not a candidate you would release unless you’re a multi-billion gaming company or Cisco

[-] Bipta@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago

Production releases still need testing. There are always bugs you don't know about hiding somewhere in projects or vast complexity.

[-] Oisteink@feddit.nl 3 points 10 months ago

There are, but if none are found it can be released - like apple and Microsoft sometimes does.

It’s what you put in it I guess. For me that’s “Hopefully ready but it’s what we’re shipping in features and functionality”

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Wiktionary: (software engineering) A version of a program that is nearly ready for release but may still have a few bugs; the status between beta version and release version.

Oxford: a version of a product, especially computer software, that is fully developed and nearly ready to be made available to the public. It comes after the beta version.

I couldn't find more definitions from "big" dictionaries, but literally no definition I've seen agrees with you. I wonder why that is.

this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
180 points (95.5% liked)

Linux

48138 readers
431 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS