On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:11:58 +0200 Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm> wrote:
> On 10 Jul 2013, at 8:41 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > While we all get busy, and derailed by nice-to-have additions, the > > activity 10:59 and 11:01 EDT Tuesday is a prime example of where the > > desire to release the code conflicts with the desire to include even > > more changes. The pattern must be broken if we are to release code > > to the public often and early, > > Can you explain why the pattern needs to be broken? Because the project is incapable of releasing more than two minor subversions, per year, at present. I certainly count you amoung the half dozen rare active committers. I'd argue that a half-dozen is insufficent. > An imminent release has the effect of incentivising people to get > their changes in, it is normal. If someone else wants a release, > nothing stops them from politely asking the group whether they can > perform the release themselves. Absolutely. And 45-150 days does not qualify as imminent. There is no need to ask; the point is that anyone is free to T&R at any point, without asking permission at all. But we've had this newer concept of 'reservations' (frequently added to STATUS) with very little to show for the practice. Courtesies extended to such reservations appear to prevent anyone else from stepping up to actually produce any releases, which is unhealthy for the project.
