I think rolling releases would be nice.
If a project has a new release and misses the deadline for a new OSGeo Live
release, it will have to wait another year.
Or even worse, if a new release contains a bug, it will be difficult to
provide a fix for a long time.
However, the arguments for one
All,
I like the rolling release idea, it will allow for a always up to date version
of things. The Stable (yearly) release will always be floating in the
background too. Not so sure about the Yearly release schedule though. Maybe
Yearly at a minimum? There might be those instances where a
r...@gmail.com>
> *Cc:* live-demo <Live-demo@lists.osgeo.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Live-demo] Motion: Move from 2 releases to 1 per year
>
>
>
> from pgRouting +1
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Cameron Shorter <
> cameron.shor...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 04/25/2017 01:16 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> As per weekly meeting discussion, we propose to switch from putting out
> two releases per year to putting out one main release per year.
-0
Release early, release often. Keep momentum by starting to work on the
next release after the most recent
from pgRouting +1
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Cameron Shorter
wrote:
> As per weekly meeting discussion, we propose to switch from putting out
> two releases per year to putting out one main release per year.
>
> We will likely also be putting out rolling
+1. The rolling release should address the needs of those who need
something more recent.
Kind regards,
Ben.
On 25/04/17 11:16, Cameron Shorter wrote:
As per weekly meeting discussion, we propose to switch from putting out
two releases per year to putting out one main release per year.
We
As per weekly meeting discussion, we propose to switch from putting out
two releases per year to putting out one main release per year.
We will likely also be putting out rolling releases which have been
untested.
Reasons:
* As per prior discussions, we want to use our volunteer time more