I've been wondering whether we could make stable releases on a more
predictable basis than we have done in the past.
In principle, it seems to me that we should make a new stable release
whenever - and as soon as - we make a fix in one of the stable
branches. In practice, we might want to temper that a little, by
(a) leaving a short while - say 2-3 days - after committing a fix,
just in case of a glaring mistake that would be picked up by
another developer building
(b) postponing a release following one fix if we know that some other
fixes will be available every soon - to avoid stupidly frequent
releases.
If we followed this, I'm pretty sure the result would be more frequent
stable releases than in the past. I don't see any problem with that,
in fact I think it would be a good thing... but then I've never
prepared a release myself. Is the release process sufficiently easy
and automated that it would allow us to do this? And what does
everyone else think about whether it's a good idea?
Regards,
Neil
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
