On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 6:05 AM, Matthias Boehm <mboe...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> In general, I like the idea of aiming for consistent release cycles. > However, every month is just too much, at least for me. There is a > considerable overhead associated with each release for end-to-end > performance tests, tests on different environments, code freeze for new > features, etc. Hence, a too short release cycle would not be "agile" but > would actually slow us down. From my perspective, a realistic release > cadence would be 2-3 months, maybe a bit more for major releases. > > 2-3 months of release cadence for an open source is probably a long stretch, particular for a project that does not have very large set of 3rd party dependencies. As for some of the overhead issues you mentioned, they are probably easy to workaround: - code-freeze timeframe can be resolved with branches - end-to-end performance regressions can be avoided by better code review, and if you were willing to go with 2-3 months without performing these tests, we could perform them only for major releases, and proactively quickly build a minor release with the patch when a user report any performance regression. Anyway, I would really like to see SystemML more agile with regards to its release process because, as I mentioned before, the release early, release often mantra is good to increase community interest, generate more traffic to the list as developers discuss the roadmap and release blockers, and also enable users to provide feedback sooner on the areas we are developing. -- Luciano Resende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/
