On Feb 26, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Ted Husted wrote:
On 2/26/06, David M Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
3) Monthly RC1: second to last thursday of each month
- If anybody thinks this month's changes warrant a release, they
ensure that user docs, install docs, change lists and database
scripts are updated and they create RC1.
3) Monthly Milestone ... and they tag the repository for X_Y_# and
create the X.Y.# build.
3b) They also create a X_Y_#+1 release target in JIRA, and update the
nightly build to reference X_Y_(#+1)-SNAPSHOT
Meanwhile, mainline development continues in the trunk, and we mark
issues "resolved" in X_Y_(#+1) as soon as the fix is committed, citing
the SVN revision number for good measure.
I understand now how this could work for us, but I guess I don't see
a good reason to change and it does seem more complex. Nobody has
spoken up on the cycle other than Ted, Allen and I have responded
about the release cycle. This could mean that folks are happy with
release cycle as is.
The repeat voting and "are we there yet" queries were irritating (and
my fault). I think the main problem with the voting has been that I
called for votes too early. We need to release an RC or two, get
positive feedback/testing and only call for a vote when it appears
that a vote can be won. Otherwise we get in a cycle.
Anybody else want to comment on the de facto release cycle that I
documented in the previous email?
- Dave
