Ken Moffat wrote: > Release early, release often. For major projects, weekly -rc > releases, and stable point releases as-necessary, is a good thing.
The release early, release often approach can be overdone. How is a typical user supposed to know when a change is significant? I have no problems with labeling a package as an intermediate point, but a 'release' is normally assumed to be fully stable unless otherwise noted, and once a week is just too much. Why bother to use a version control system? I've wondered, in the case of the kernel, whether is would be beneficial to release the drivers as a separate tarball on a different release schedule. I think that's where most of the changes occur. In an uncompressed kernel tarball, the drivers are 260M of 532M total. > I don't follow systemd, no doubt some of the changes are important > for the project, but without monitoring it I can't guess which, if > any, impact the udev part. I'm still hoping that standalone udev > will gain traction. That would require a major attitude change from the developers. IMO they have a vested emotional interest in not separating udev. > Going back to ImageMagick, they seem to be stuck in decimal > numbering, and almost every change results in a new release. > With their current release numbering, it's pure guesswork whether > any particular version will be good - most are ok, and the > vulnerable ones get pulled, but in many ways it's just a rolling > release. Agree. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
