10 Oct
2010
10 Oct
'10
11 a.m.
I support 4 month cycle, the 3 months turned out to be unrealistic,
while 6 months is too long time between releases (we are speaking
about normal development, not kernel rewrites which have to take that
long time).
WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.
On Oct 9, 2010, at 5:14 PM, Olaf Siejka wrote:
I think its a good time to discuss current development
cycle.
It become clear to me, that there is no way we can currently adhere
to 3 months development cycle. Its pointless to stick to something
we managed to succeed only once or twice.
Agreeing with the fact we do need releases, for various reasons, i
would like to propose a new, longer cycle.
The most apparent choices to me are 4 and 6 month ones. At least
half of the cycle would be spent on all out development, with the
following half turning its concentration to stabilizing trunk,
searching for regressions and bugs, fixing them. The cycles would
be separated by branching the release version. The actual release
would be taking place on the first month of the NEXT DEVELOPMENT
cycle. The actual emergency hacking, writing changelog etc. One
month is more than enough, to release two RC (at the branching and
next one - after two weeks). End of the month must result in final
release. RC should be rather released internally for testing
purposes on a default iso.
The actual proposals are:
4 months:
month 1: Development on version x. At the same time, the Release
x-1 is to be final-tested, emergency-hacked, changelogged and
shipped. The deadline is end of month 1.
month 2: Development on version x. All development that can affect
trunk stability, but also will not be shipped with the release X
should end or be limited to branch only by the end of this month;
month 3: Switching from development more to stabilizing trunk,
searching for regressions, fixing bugs. Finalizing sub-projects
that are to be included in release x;
month 4; No new functionality/code, bug-fixing and hunting
regressions. This month should end with branching for release x;
6 months:
month 1: Development on version x. At the same time, the Release
x-1 is to be final-tested, emergency-hacked, changelogged and
shipped. The deadline is end of month 1.
month 2: Development on version x;
month 3: Development on version x. All development that can affect
trunk stability, but also will not be shipped with the release X
should end or be limited to branch only by the end of this month;
month 4: Switching from development more to stabilizing trunk,
searching for regressions, fixing bugs. Ongoing development work
only for features that are to be shipped with release x;
month 5: Switching from development more to stabilizing trunk,
searching for regressions, fixing bugs. Finalizing sub-projects
that are to be included in release x;
month 6: No new functionality/code, bug-fixing and hunting
regressions. This month should end with branching for release x;
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev