+1 from me as well. Let's try it out
On 7/10/18, 11:23 AM, "Sam Tunnicliffe" <[email protected]> wrote:
+1 here too
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 18:52, Marcus Eriksson <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 here as well
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 7:06 PM Aleksey Yeshchenko <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 from me too.
> >
> > —
> > AY
> >
> > On 10 July 2018 at 04:17:26, Mick Semb Wever ([email protected]) wrote:
> >
> >
> > > We have done all this for previous releases and we know it has not
> > worked
> > > well. So how giving it one more try is going to help here. Can someone
> > > outline what will change for 4.0 which will make it more successful?
> >
> >
> > I (again) agree with you Sankalp :-)
> >
> > Why not try something new?
> > It's easier to discuss these things more genuinely after trying it out.
> >
> > One of the differences in the branching approaches: to feature-freeze on
> a
> > 4.0 branch or on trunk; is who it is that has to then merge and work
with
> > multiple branches.
> >
> > Where that small but additional effort is placed I think becomes a
signal
> > to what the community values most: new features or stability.
> >
> > I think most folk would vote for stability, so why not give this
approach
> > a go and to learn from it.
> > It also creates an incentive to make the feature-freeze period as short
> as
> > possible, moving us towards an eventual goal of not needing to
> > feature-freeze at all.
> >
> > regards,
> > Mick
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
