Jeffrey P Shell wrote:
But release often is a BITCH for software configuration management.
Good for developers, bad for deployers.
Why?
Chris
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 13:32:59 -0700
Jeffrey P Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 04:22 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
It what world do you live, and can I move there?
You miss the point ;-)
The flurry to get features into a 'stable'
Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
It what world do you live, and can I move there?
You miss the point ;-)
The flurry to get features into a 'stable' release is what I was on about.
If you flurry, the release won't be stable.
I like the pattern of having stable releases and CVS or nightly builds for
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Chris Withers wrote:
The flurry to get features into a 'stable' release is what I was on about.
If you flurry, the release won't be stable.
I like the pattern of having stable releases and CVS or nightly builds for
people who want the latest and greatest. That way
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 04:22 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
It what world do you live, and can I move there?
You miss the point ;-)
The flurry to get features into a 'stable' release is what I was on
about.
If you flurry, the release won't be stable.
I like
Likewise, with Zope my impression is that once the Beta is cut, we are in
feature freeze. Now, ZC may not have operated that way in the
past *entirely*,
but I think we should from now on.
A flurry of commits *before* feature freeze seems unaviodable, however.
That's what deadlines are
Chris McDonough wrote:
FWIW, the reason that there is a flurry of activity before any release
is because people want to see features in a stable release version and
by nature (IMHO) programmers are procrastinators. ;-)
This doesn't fit with normal open source practice. Why are we starting to
Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
It what world do you live, and can I move there? Every large open source
project I've particpated in or kept track of has had this problem - it's
_really hard_ to turn down cool new patches just because your supposed to
be in feature freeze, trying to get a stable
Oliver Bleutgen writes:
...
What do _you_ think 'normal open source practice' is?
FWIW, see as an example
http://developer.kde.org/development-versions/kde-3.0-release-plan.html
and/or
http://developer.kde.org/development-versions/kde-3.2-features.html
Seems to work
