Re: [Protux-devel] Regarding Release Coordination

[Remon Sijrier]

I agree with most of this, but the "major" releases should have some 
stabilization level to get at least a user base to have the feedback. (I only 
got 1 feedback from a user till now :-(  )
Releasing it with known bugs is not such a good idea :-P

When somebody starts protux and the first thing he/she notices that this or 
that feature isn't working he/she will be disapointed and get its hands of, 
and we have a user less we can rely on.

But it's indeed not such an important thing right now, maybe after 0.50.0?

Thanks,

Remon


On Thursday 04 December 2003 01:38, Luciano Giordana wrote:
> I somehow had decided something like that. The only major releases will be
> 0.30, 040, 050, 0.60, 0.70,0.80, 0.90 and 1.0 only (more 8 only), no more
> intermediate release, only via CVS.
>
> But there is no need to fork CVs, althought this a good idea. The "major
> releases" are just points to expand the marketing and get a bigger user
> base so we get the feedback.
>
> for example, next 0.30 will have the undo engine (among other things). This
> is important step and I believe it worths a major release. Also, dont worry
> TOO Much in stabilization of any relaease before 1.0. Only partial
> stabilization, just to have a good binary and expand our user base.
>
> the 1.0 is the real  "FIRST" protux. all the releases so far are just a
> branch of unstable code.  :-)
>
> On Wednesday 03 December 2003 05:30 pm, Remon Sijrier wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I had some little discussion about this with Reinhard and unfortunately
> > this conversation didn't go via protux-devel and I deleted those mails
> > per accident. So I have to do it with my memory ;-)
> >
> > Most important point was this:
> >
> > "Do not release protux until everything is finished/tested/updated etc.."
> >
> > I understand this puts a high limit on development when nearing to a
> > release, but it has been a month ago since 0.20.0 is out, and the website
> > and docs are still _very_ out of date....
> > Of course, protux is meant to in development mode til 0.50.0, but if you
> > rely to much on this, it doesn't make sense to release "major" releases
> > at all
> >
> >
> > So I suggest to do it different in the future:
> >
> > Split CVS into "stable" and "head" This must be somehow possible. When
> > nearing the next major release, fork CVS into "stable" and "HEAD", freeze
> > the "stable" branch and continue development on "head". Only bugfixes
> > will be excepted for the "stable" branch. (which makes it for me much
> > easier to add bugfixes to a release. It's very hard for me to do it now.
> > Also for other people to download the bugfixes to test it)
> > Then go for testing "stable" until there are no more important bugs, and
> > _after_ the docs and website has been updated, announce the new release.
> >
> > One of the things which happend just before the 0.20.0 release was that
> > there were a bunch of features added which introduces new bugs. That's of
> > course annoying and IMHO should be avoided. With the release structure
> > mentioned above this will no longer happen, and also prevents the
> > developer to do such things.
> >
> > I also prefer to have something like a "release coordinator". Although it
> > may seem a bit of overstructuring the whole process, it puts of the load
> > from the developers, and a release only comes when it is time....
> >
> >
> > Thanks and RFC please.
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Remon
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Protux-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/protux-devel