[rurban: Re: setup.exe command line parameters]

[Brian Dessent]

Dave Korn wrote:

>   I'm ok with that, asuming that the answers to these two questions are
> reasonable and proportionate to a Rea-Soon-Now release timeframe:

Well see that's the problem with this plan -- there have been so many
changes since the last release that I'd want to do a RC first and
advertise its existance on the main list for a week or two of public
tire kicking or so before going live.  Past experience has always shown
that this is required because virtually nobody follows the -apps lists
and does regular testing of snapshots, and problems always seem to crop
up.

But, alternatively, if we decide just to go with the release
branch+verification backport I think we can bypass this and just go live
now if you're confident enough about it.  But when the idea of slipping
in more and more things comes up I start to feel uneasy and want to go
back to having a public RC to prevent egg on our face.  Do you see the
dilemma?  I'd really rather not rush a release with a bunch of changes,
so can we just push out the verification change only and then work on
stabilizing HEAD and doing a RC without the time pressure?

Brian