Taylor, What's the release cycle that you are looking for?
Also, for big features like replication, it may be hard to decompose it into multiple releases. We can probably stage it so that some of the more advanced stuff (e.g., rebalance with new brokers) are released later. However, even to get the basic replication work done requires significant changes. Any suggests on how to do this better is welcomed. Thanks, Jun On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Taylor Gautier <tgaut...@tagged.com> wrote: > No - just that big feature changes are more risky than smaller ones > and having smaller upgrades helps identify unexpected issues more > easily. > > Having fixed time length releases reduces the tendency for releases to > grow larger. > > Another benefit of frequent small releases is that you'll get good at > it so the process should become easier and more routine with time. > With big releases and long periods of real time in between this won't > be as likely to happen. > > > > On Nov 11, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Jun Rao <jun...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi, Taylor, > > > > Are you more worried about bug fixes? If so, we can have some fixed > release > > interval for bug fix releases. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jun >
