Friday March 29th, 2002
The mozilla.org Status Reports was updated, and included some information on what email@example.com are up to, and what's coming up:
#17 Is calling it RC1 a big and unnecessary PR risk?
Saturday March 30th, 2002 8:15 AM
You are replying to this message
> Why do you say that it is clear that RC1 will not be > nearly good enough to be renamed as the unqualified 1.0?
On reflection, that's unwarranted.
Let me see if I can nail down my concern without overstating anything. It would be OK if "Mozilla 1.0 Release Candidate 1" had a minor regression or two, but it could well be rather bad news press-wise if it includes any significant regressions. My guess would be that the press would lambast Mozilla for having such poor QA practices that they A) have not bothered with the conventional alpha/beta sequence, and B) have, consequently, released a buggy product. *I* know that this is wrong, that Mozilla has had milestones instead, and that it will be adopting conventional alpha/beta nomenclature post 1.0, but that's beside the point. So, I'd like to see a "Mozilla 1.0 Beta" even if it's followed just a few days later by a "Mozilla 1.0 Release Candidate 1", or even more simply by an after-the-fact dual labelling of the Beta as RC1.