9 Dec
2006
9 Dec
'06
8:02 p.m.
I definitely agree with releasing more often, however I have a bit
of a different take on the idea. The way I see it a "real" release every
3 months would be a good idea because then they are more likely to have
some improvements that are news worthy and are less likely to get
slammed in the media. Along with these tri-monthly releases there would
be bi-weekly tested releases, like snapshots, I think these would work
well with automatic regression testing.
In any case releasing more often in whatever form is a good idea I
think.
Regards
Peter
Aleksey Bragin wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to hear opinions regarding the change in release policy.
The proposition:
Release happens on a strict time basis, like once per month. That
means, at the end of the month we look for the best revision inside
this month (probably which is closer to the end of the month), branch
from it, apply all fixes (if any), and release.
Disadvantage: a few coming releases' quality will be overall lower,
there might be things like 0.3.25 (if release frequency is set too
high, and this is not a disadvantage actually).
Advantages: in the long run quality goes up, more developers due to
higher release rate, more publicity, people will finally realize it's
an alpha product, more bugs reported, no signs of a dead project (I
doubt there are healthy projects doing 1 release per year :)).
Any thoughts are appreciated.
With the best regards,
Aleksey Bragin.
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev