Hehe...
On 3 July 2013 17:37, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: > +1. Also, the 24th of July is my birthday so I might not vote on the > day itself. Don't be angry. > > B. > > > On 3 July 2013 17:13, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey folks, > > > > I've been doing a bit of thinking about the way we handle our new timed > > based released, and I've come to the conclusion that doing a vote on the > > 3rd Tuesday of every month is a flawed approach. > > > > There are delays in testing, and oftentimes multiple vote rounds. This > will > > consistently result in the situation where we are doing the actual > release > > several weeks behind schedule. The result being that, according to the > > calendar, I would be doing another vote perhaps a week, or even days > after > > the release. This clearly makes no sense. > > > > So, I am proposing that we attempt to do a new release four weeks after > the > > last release. > > > > i.e. We released 1.3.1 1 week ago, so I am proposing that we attempt > > another release in three weeks. > > > > This means that even if it takes us several weeks to do the next one, we > > will then set a 4 week timer at whatever point we manage to make the > > successful release. > > > > I believe this properly accounts for the fact that we are a volunteer > > project, and that sometimes, things just take a while. But it also keeps > us > > on a time based schedule. > > > > One other change I am proposing: I think that in three weeks, we should > cut > > whatever is ready. If that means a major point revision, so be it. Minor, > > so be it. Patch, so be it. Whatever is ready. No artificial "patch > > release", "patch release", "feature release" dance. > > > > Assuming nobody objects, or has a better way of doing it, I will proceed > > with this idea. > > > > You can consider this notice that I plan to start a release vote thread > on > > the Tuesday the 24th of July. So you have three weeks to get your > features > > into master. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- > > NS > -- NS
