On Oct 21, 2010, at 6:49 AM, Ivan wrote: > 2010/10/21 Jacek Laskowski <[email protected]> > >> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:23 PM, David Blevins <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Yikes, it was one year and 6 days since our last 3.1.x release. Hadn't >> realized it was so bad :) >> >> Me neither until Adam Bien tweeted it a few days back. >> >>> Maybe we should try time-boxed releases for a while? I think CXF does 2 >> months. >> >> I'm hardly active development-wise, but with the other active >> committers it does make sense. I'd go for it and see what we come up >> with in 2 months. >> > I am thinking that except for the normal plan, 2 or 3 months for a regular > release. Guess that some special rules are also required, e.g. If a security > bug is fixed, an immediate release should be done. For those relative > inactive branch, 3.0.*, we could take a little long time for a regular > release.
Right, I'm thinking to only time-box only the most active codebase. So trunk. We probably might have some maintenance on 3.1.x for a while, but I suspect we could do those on an as needed basis. -David
