Hello. On Tue, 2014-02-25 at 09:17, Adrien Nader wrote: > > I don't expect, nor intend, to delay the release of 1.9. I only want to > record my belief as a packager that the release cycles are too short and > that the stabilization phases are _way_ too short (let's face it, no > packager does continuous integration/packaging).
Is that a guts feeling or do you have concrete examples or problems you see with the curent state of 1.9? You are the first packager that complains about this so far. What distro are you packging for? What is the release cycle of this distro? I personally think that three months are not that bad. I agree on the short stabilizatiopn phase at the end tho. For 1.10 we will shift it a bit to have three weeks at the end. The problem with stabilization phases in such an active project is how long can you bind the focus of the developers on stibilization. I believe it would not help if we make a 8 weeks stabilization phase while all the devs are working on new features already and nobody is looking into the bugs. It would be great and pefect if we can release without any bugs but reality tells us that is not the case. We try to deal withg this by providing stable updates for all the fixes we do after the release. I had the feeling that worked pretty well for 1.8 already but I'm biased so I'm happy to hear about concrete problems. regards Stefan Schmidt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Flow-based real-time traffic analytics software. Cisco certified tool. Monitor traffic, SLAs, QoS, Medianet, WAAS etc. with NetFlow Analyzer Customize your own dashboards, set traffic alerts and generate reports. Network behavioral analysis & security monitoring. All-in-one tool. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=126839071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
