I think robert is right here. We want to do more frequent releases and to go that path we need to stop waiting for a week for feature / improvement X. We can spin another release in 4 weeks I think we should actually. If we do that and increment the version number by 1 each time we reach 3.9 by the end of the year, just ready for 4.0 :)
here is my +1 On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> True. Only thought that we might want to give people time to ensure that >> things that are important to them are included in 3.2. > > Why? if these issues are so critical they should be marked as blockers! > > Again, why wait a week, we could release again in a week instead! > > This whole lifecycle is broken: > 1. hey everyone, lets release in X days. > 2. people rush in all their favorite pet features, maybe in sloppy > fashion since they really want to get them in, which destabilizes the > code. > 3. we generate RC after RC because in each one someone finds a new > bug... there are always bugs and if 3.2 doesnt introduce the bug, i > dont think it should block it... 3.2 fixes some bugs and we can fix > more bugs in 3.3 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
