I'm not sure I can predict how a 4 month development cycle might look. We need to be releasing at least something way more frequently or we'll never get our release process streamlined, oiled up, and always running warm like a finely tuned engine.
Currently our release process is like a old car that sits in the driveway for months and months and a simple trip to the store takes forever because you have to change the oil, fill up the tires, clean the windows and chase raccoons out of the trunk before you can get it on the road. Then it breaks down 3 or 4 times on the way there.... -David On Sep 30, 2011, at 1:55 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > +1 for a 4 mounths release with 3 weeks beta. > > - Romain > > Le 30 sept. 2011 22:33, "Karan Malhi" <[email protected]> a écrit : >> I agree too. A release every 4 months with a feature freeze around 3 >> weeks ahead of the release would be good, should give a window for >> bug-fixing for the release. Once we agree upon the general time lines, >> I could go ahead and document this process. Predictable release cycles >> are always good from the users perspective too. >> >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Jonathan Gallimore >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I definitely agree. Sounds great. >>> >>> Jon >>> On Sep 30, 2011 8:01 PM, "David Blevins" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Was chatting with Romain and he mentioned some fixes he wanted to add > that >>> didn't make this release. I imagine that there'll be plenty of fixes that >>> will happen over the next couple weeks. >>>> >>>> For several small reasons that add up and are totally unmeasurable, we >>> tend to drift into long release cycles. We say we're going to release > more >>> frequently, but it hasn't happened yet. I'm thinking maybe we just need > to >>> set the date to ensure we actually do. >>>> >>>> What do people think about a next release potentially as short as 2 > weeks >>> from now? >>>> >>>> >>>> -David >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Karan Singh Malhi >> twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
