On 3 July 2013 20:57, Dirkjan Ochtman <[email protected]> wrote: > So that means we have no guarantees of any kind on how long we go > between feature releases
We didn't anyway. If there were no features ready for a feature release window, we'd do a patch release. The only thing the release procedure can ever do is *delay* the release of features. which also means our shortest possible > maintenance window for old release might be something like 8-10 weeks? > Not sure what to do about this. Perhaps we support major versions for 12 months. Thoughts? (There should be no reason to support minor versions.) I mean, personally I'm fine with this, I always keep up to date with > the latest release anyway. But what you're proposing here seems like a > somewhat big deal for those slightly more enterprisey types who like > themselves some stability, instead of forcing to be upgraded to a > release with new features (and consequently, new bugs). > Perhaps we're talking cross-wires here, but I don't see this. Do my comments above clear things up? -- NS
