I'm +1 for communicating to the user community a particular expected release cadence. It helps set expectations. I'm +0 on 3 months being what is communicated.
I'm -1 on this being a reason to vote down a release proposed by someone. If a member of the PMC wants to start a release because they perceive a need, they should be able to. A general release cadence is not a reason to vote down a release. -- Jacques Nadeau CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Parth Chandra <[email protected]> wrote: > As we discussed in the hangout today, based on the last few releases, it > looks like a slightly longer time period between releases is probably > called for. The 1.7 release was almost four months and folks had started > asking questions about the release while the 1.8 release was done in much > less time and we found quite a few show stopper issues at the last minute. > It seems that a three month cycle is probably appropriate at this time > since that does not keep folks waiting for a new release and also provides > enough time for the team to test things thoroughly before a release. > > What does everyone think? > > Parth >
