2008/12/22 Graham Percival <[email protected]>: > Once 2.12 is out and we've succeeded in setting up GUB3 on > kainhofer, I'll become the Release Manager. I have two ideas on > how to change things:
Good to see you're still involved, Mr "I'm-leavin'-soon-anyway-so-just-pretend-I'm-not-here" :-) > 2) Keep the distinction between stable and devel, but tie it to > the input syntax, and allow for much faster releases. In > particular, there would be *no* convert-ly rules for 2.12. New > constructs would be fine, but any patches that would change > existing syntax would be delayed until 2.13. Hm, let's not be too strict in advance. No "major" breakage in 2.12 is already a sensible goal; no syntax change at all... well, there's always the possibility that we have to correct some inconsistency we may have missed until now, or whatever. > In the past we've avoided this kind of policy since it slows down > development, but my proposal is to have /much/ faster development > cycles. Maybe something like 3 months of 2.12 releases, then 2 > months of 2.13 releases (including the delayed syntax changes), > and then 2.14. Then we'd repeat it again. Actually, not having to backport anything from 2.13 to 2.12 might also make development move faster. > Yes, this would mean that some patches would be delayed a few > months, but with git it's easier to test them in separate > branches. We'd also be flexible about when to start 2.13 -- if > there was a great new feature that required changing the existing > syntax, we could start .13 earlier than 3 months. Conversely, if > all development is simply adding new features or fixing bugs, we > don't start .13 until later. Does this mean you do not want to make any difference between odd and even versions? Cheers, Valentin _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
