Yeah the RC or M numbering is usually the schema because you never know when you're going to stop improving it. No big deal though. As long as you can distinguish between milestone/candidate pre-GA releases that's great.
Actually it was supposed to be the 1.1.0-RC (without any number). I did that on purpose, as I thought we would't do another RC for this version (This topic will be discussed in another mail).
But if the habit is to number any RC, then for the next version it will RC1 instead of RC. ;)
Pierre-ArnaudOn Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:55 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
It was supposed to be a 1.1.0-RC1. As the 1 is missing, let's assume
that it was a RC0 :)