I think it really helps to have a bit of focus and something to aim for, so how about something a bit more specific?
The longer the trunk goes between releases the harder and more time consuming it is to get it ready for another release. Its already been two weeks since the 0.90 branch was taken. On top of that it takes about two weeks just polishing and voting once a branch is taken. I proposed another week or two from now before taking a branch as I think thats plenty of time to get the things I'd like to release ready, if thats too quick how long should it be? ...ant On 5/31/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's good to do more frequent releases than we did in the past. I'm not sure about cutting a branch only a week or 2 after delivering the previous release. Maybe we should let 0.90 get out there and give it enough time for people to download and use it and give their reactions, so that we have some user feedback on 0.90 before we decide what should be in the next release. Simon ant elder wrote: > With the 0.90 release almost out how about starting on 0.91? Its been > almost > 3 weeks since the code chill for 0.90, be good if we could start doing > releases much more regularly and 4 - 6 weeks for a small point release > seems > good to me, so how about aiming for cutting an 0.91 branch in a week or 2? > The main things I'd like to get out are the improvements to the scripting > scripting support with optional .componentType sidefiles and dynamic > interfaces, and the ajax binding and jsonrpc binding simplification and > unification. With those, the new feed binding and the port of the > aggregator > sample that would give 0.91 a sort of web20/scripting focus, and doing it > quick like this should make it relatively easy to get done by using the > trunk stability from 0.90. > > ...ant > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
