hi, having fixed release dates doesn't make much sense IMO, releases should be driven by content, not by dates.
cheers seb -- Sébastien Lelong Le 1 janv. 2010 à 21:16, mattschinkel <[email protected]> a écrit : > It seems that there are new releases every 6 months, maybe we could > reduce this to every 3 months? > > We could also create a standard, or set dates for the next releases. > This way everyone has notice for the next release. If you miss the > release date, you may miss the bus. > > jan 1st > march 1st > june 1st > sept 1st > > Matt. > > On Jan 1, 7:58 am, William <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Jan 1, 3:10 am, Rob Hamerling <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> In defense of Seb: he was indeed quick, but release 0.5 was only >>> postponed due to the announcement of Kyle that compiler 2.4m was >>> due. >> >> I also want to wish all a happy New Year. >> >> But may I respectfully ask that we establish/document the finer >> details of the release process. I would suggest at least a 48 hour >> 'final boarding call'. >> >> Also, it seems unlikely that Kyle's latest official version has had >> any serious testing with JALLIB. This is not good, in my opinion. >> >> William > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "jallib" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en > . > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
