My question is what criteria are applied to differentiate a "test" build from a "test/stable" build?
A quote from my related question seems to indicate that "test" builds may eventually be deemed as "stable" and are copied out of the TEST directory:
egc wrote:
All builds are beta
At the moment the test and "stable" build are the same.
Once in a while a new test build arrives and when Kong considers it stable then he moves the build to the stable directory
So you still have the doubt or you wanted to re-post?
If it's the former then no, there's no criteria, he just considers that's "less beta" based on feedback and how polished is the build. _________________ R6400v2 (boardID:30) - Kong 36480 running since 03/09/18 - (AP - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R7800 - BS 31924 running since 05/26/17 - (AP - OpenVPN Client - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R7000 - BS 30771 running since 12/16/16 - (AP - NAS - FTP - SMB - OpenVPN Server - Transmission - DDNS - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R6250 - BS 29193 running since 03/20/16 - (AP - NAS - FTP - SMB - DNSMasq - AdBlocking)
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 20:21 Post subject: Re: Kong builds: Test/stable vs. stable
Xeon2k8 wrote:
If it's the former then no, there's no criteria, he just considers that's "less beta" based on feedback and how polished is the build.
Yes, I was thinking there might be a set of criteria that gets applied to differentiate like a linux kernel for example. An rc1 is proposed based on a patchset. Once Greg sees there are no posts about regressions in a multiple day time frame, the rc suffix is dropped and the new kernel is formally released as stable. Thanks for the info. Just learning about how things work upstream.
