Hanno Schlichting wrote:
What do you think about a 9 month release cycle?
Based on the Plone experience I think this is a good compromise, between
release often and stable releases.
The Plone experience as I see it is that we get some measure of
Take Plone 2.5 and 3.0. With the cycles of review bundles (similar to
Zope proposals and discussions), development of new features, bug fixes,
merging to alphas, releasing betas and rcs, we found that we basically
had to get started on 3.0 just as (if not before) 2.5 final went out the
door. That's pretty exhausting. People pull together on bugdays and
their spare time to get a particular release out, and then they are
being hounded for the next release already.
In other words - 6 months is a really short time, especially if you
expect to have a reasonable alpha and beta cycle where things stabilise.
And further, it's very hard to get people to work on two releases
simultaneously (polishing x whilst starting on x+1).
I agree that 9 months is a better compromise. 12 months is a very long
time. The other important thing is to manage scope - let people know
quite early what is and what isn't in scope for a particular release and
set clear, agreed-upon timelines for things like proposal deadlines,
feature freezes, and alpha/beta releases.
Just my opinion, of course.
Zope3-dev mailing list