It's most certainly something worth aiming for. We need to ensure explicit time is given to bug fixing, so +1 from me :)
On 24 June 2011 11:37, Nicolas Héron <nicolas.heron.j...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > I vote for that. More release more often => Less function per release => > less risk > Regards > Nicolas > > 2011/6/24 Geoffrey De Smet <ge0ffrey.s...@gmail.com> > >> ** >> If we do more releases, the releases process will become easier and maybe >> even a non-event. >> At least, I believe that paradox :) >> >> Here's what I propose: >> - For the next 4 weeks, until 22-JUL, we focus on big, risky features. >> - The 2 weeks after that, until 5-AUG, we focus on bugfixing and *avoid >> risky changes*. >> On 5-AUG, I release 5.3.0.Beta1 directly from master. >> If needed, we can call it 5.3.0.Alpha1 instead. >> >> This will allow our users to verify backwards compatibility and new >> features sooner >> and give us feed-back sooner. >> >> What do you think? Good idea or too ambitious? >> >> -- >> With kind regards, >> Geoffrey De Smet >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-dev mailing list >> rules-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > rules-dev mailing list > rules-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev > >
_______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
