You make some very good points, Kevin.

My question is , how relevant is this to BW?

I think there is a general problem in determining when  a BW release
is "stable".

It happened many times that Dan announced a stable or fairly stable
release, only to discover after a few days that it broke some things
which worked before, and it needed some fixing.

The consolidation phase  for a stable release you mention, where bugs
get fixed, but no new features added, no major code is rewritten, is
not happening for BW.

I think this may be so because the user base is fairly small, the ones
active on the list are all working with "cutting edge" releases, and
Dan is really only interested in pushing BW forward fast, and does not
want to bother with "consolidation".

This makes for exciting development, but not good for finding stability.

Dan's suggestion for a new naming convention helps to identify a
release as "more stable", but the challenge is still there to proof
its stability, and I am afraid no one is interested to do so, as
everyone wants to go with the cutting edge, as that is the only
development front there is (and nobody to blame for that).

Going with Dan's suggestion and renaming 3.18 to 3.2, to mark it as a
"stable release", I wonder when it is appropriate? Two days of no bug
reports seems very short to me. But if Dan waits longer, say two
weeks, to judge the stability of 3.18, he meanwhile has already
produced 3.19 to 3.25! And if some bug is reported from 3.18, it won't
get fixed, but the user will be asked to try the latest, say 3.22! So
we won't see a consolidation. Instead, we see a continuous "cutting
edge" development, which may be be called continuous beta releases,
from the develoment cycle model Kevin mentioned.

I am afraid someone  needs to do the consolidation work, and it is not
Dan. He is not even that interested in updating documentation (a big
part of the consolidation work) and calls on the community for that.

Thinking about the version numbering:
It may be better not to rename 3.18 to 3.2 and dive into new releases 3.2.xx.
It may be better to keep 3.18 and start a new phase (with new features
added etc) with 3.21 then 3.2.2 etc, a new 3.2.xx phase, and mark the
3.18 as "fairly stable" at some point (when?).

anyway, just some thoughts....

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"BoltWire" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/boltwire?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to