On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 03:38:49PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Mark de Wever <[email protected]>: > > So maybe we should look at how > > to give the next development releases a better testing earlier in > > the > > cycle. Preferably I'd like to see more user testing starting in the > > middle of the cycle so we still have time to do more intrusive > > changes. > > Yes, and while we're at it I'd like a pony. > > That is a deliberately sarcastic idiom in English conveying that > wishes don't count for much. I think the only way we're going to get > more user testing is by shipping "stable" releases more often, which > is to say seriously shortening our development cycle.
Well the goal was to start to think about how to achieve that wish. Since I've no real ideas about what we could do to improve the situation I just wanted to start the discussion. I'm not sure whether the shortening the development cycle really helps (I think not) but we could try it. The last time we also discussed the idea of a half year cycle and rejected it. But since the current model also doesn't 'work' in this regard we can at least try it. So if we aim for half a year that would be the middle of September, which would also fit with gsoc (if we get in). > > Would it be an idea to fork 1.6 about a day after tagging so commits > > which are needed in both trunk and 1.6 can be applied to both > > without > > merging? > > If we're going to do that, what would the point be of tagging earlier? I thought I've seen several commits aimed at 1.6 postponed/reverted due to the string freeze, which is lifted once 1.6 has been tagged. -- Regards, Mark de Wever aka Mordante/SkeletonCrew _______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
