On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 09:36:29AM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > On 06/13/2013 10:30 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > > Fair enough. But I think you're talking about Step Two. There is more > > work on what "stable" means, what time schedules to use, etc. That's > > Step One. > > In private mail, you also asked for tighter definition of the various > trimesters of stability (which is an interesting choice of terminology in my > own personal life right now, but I digress...). Here's my thinking: > > Tri 1: Trunk builds and passes tests, but may have crazy new, > sweeping-change types of features on it. We've tried to be > forward-thinking, but who knows if these are the APIs/protocols/etc. that > we'll wind up with in the release. At the end of this period, we might say > we're merely "build stable". We could ship an alpha at the end of this > period to get the crazy new features into the public's hands for user > acceptance testing. >
I like the idea of sprinkling alpha/beta releases along the way. > Tri 2: Trunk builds and passes tests, and the crazy stuff is still getting > hammered into release-worthiness, but we're not allowing any more crazy > stuff in. Smallish features and enhancements are fine, but nothing like a > WC-NG or Ev2 or FS-NG or.... At the end of this period, we would say we're > "feature stable", and could ship a beta release. > > Tri 3: Trunk is feature-complete. Oh, and it builds and passes tests. :-) > We're serious about getting this thing ready to release, now. Strictly > speaking, this "period" of trunk's life extends until the final release is > cut by taking the "release branch" side of the fork in the road. But we > don't want to lock down the trunk indefinitely, so we get as much > stabilization done on the trunk as we can before branching for release > stabilization and reopening the trunk for a new "first trimester". Which trimester is concurrent to the "1.N.x branched, but 1.N.0 not released yet" period?
