On 8 Feb 2011, at 17:32, Noah Slater wrote: > > On 8 Feb 2011, at 16:14, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > >> Still, the problem I have is that it seems like there is a tendency to >> make releases large; it seems like there's little control against devs >> wanting to add their "one more thing". Particularly for bugfix >> releases; from 1.0.1 it took almost 6 months for 1.0.2 to get >> released. In between, there were a little under 100 revisions on the >> 1.0.x branch, presumably most of those fixing bugs users could >> actually run into. It seems valuable to me if the community could have >> gotten some of these fixes sooner. > > I need someone else to weigh in on this, but I believe the reason was because > of a few critical bugs that were being worked on. And not, as you suggest, > because we were suffering from a Just One More Thing problem. I'd really need > Jan or Chris to comment though as I use them as a conduit for judging this > stuff.
Robert already confirmed this, but I'd like to point out that Noah's analysis is apt. -- As for the suggestions for more transparency regarding what new features are being worked on and when do they land in which version I agree that we can do better and I'll take on doing some of the legwork here. I also like the proposed features, but I don't think committing to ship pony-features without seeing any code is a good idea — just to paint an extreme, so far nobody suggested that. Cheers Jan --
