The first step in establishing a release cycle will be setting the period. Here again, I think that we all agree in principle on a sixth month cycle.
>From Sugar Labs perspective the actual time period is quite arbitrary. The lower bound is how quickly we can effectively iterate through the innovate-stabilize-release cycle. The upper limit is how long we can go before a release becomes stale. >From a Redhat perspective something that lines up with the Fedora release cycle makes sense. >From a OLPC perspective the issue is more complicated. The cost benefit analysis boils down to the cost of pushing a new release vs. the benefit gained by improvements in the new release minus the cost of supporting each additional release. I will happily leave the math on that on to Jim;) With these facts in mind, Sugar Labs doing six month releases seems optimal. OLPC can pick up releases bases on their needs. thanks dfarning _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
