Sorry, kept forgetting to reply. I would prefer we not create a schedule. When to release should factor in momentum, importance to the community, even marketing opportunities like conferences.
IMO, if a someone wants to take the time and effort to be an RM for a release, and can make the case that the new things in the release are going to be worth the effort to release it, and it won’t take away from momentum of someone else trying to release one of our other packages, then, until my work situation changes, I will always find time to review it (although I may not get to it right away). And if I don’t see enough other folks step up to review that release, until Peter’s work situation changes, I will ask Peter to review it as well. So, at least for now, anyone who wants to be an RM can be pretty sure there will be 3 voters. -Alex On 12/8/14, 5:08 AM, "Kessler CTR Mark J" <mark.kessler....@usmc.mil> wrote: > Should we just leave a one month break, in-between releases and >start working on the next one after that? Meaning there could be an SDK >release every 2 months or up to 6 times a year. Releases would show >minor revisions unless there is a significant addition to the change list. > >-Start release cycle (takes roughly a month) >-After release is complete 1 month to gather more changes. >-Start next release cycle. > > >-Mark
