Shannon Lloyd <sjlloydNO@spamlikwid.com> wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing something, but why are packages still being upgraded
> (not patched/fixed, but upgraded to newer versions) in the current tree?
> If current is/was meant to be 10.1-beta, shouldn't there only be
> fixes/patches/security upgrades until 10.1 is released? How is -current
> actually a beta of 10.1 if (potentially) new features etc are still
> being added to it? Am I confusing beta with RC? I was under the
> impression that 10.1-beta would be 10.1 once any reported bugs and/or
> security issues had been ironed out. What's the point of announcing
> 10.1-beta if packages are still being upgraded? Other than to make
> people's stomachs grumble in anticipation, of course.

Many application programmers now issue bug fixes in the form of a new
release number (minor or patch level increment), not a patch to the
current release number. It makes it easier to keep track of which versions
have which bugs in it. For example. the release notes of Pine 4.62 say
right at the top that it corrects several bugs (and also throws in a few
new features). And just to reinforce this, if you look up the changelog
for popa3d 0.6.4.1, the only change from 0.6.4 to 0.6.4.1 is a bug fix.
Also, sometimes upgrading one package requires upgrading related packages
as well, so you might see that sort of run in the changelog when a package
is updated.

Additionally, in the past the pre-release current did always used to be
called RCx not beta. I think it's best to think of it in that terms. If
new but stable versions of software get released shortly, there's always a
chance it'll be included even if there isn't a bug fix. Perhaps less so
this release run-up than in the past given PV's changelog message, but
there's always a chance.