[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Release process & rolling new releases

From: Justus Winter
Subject: Re: Release process & rolling new releases
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:42:00 +0200
User-agent: alot/0.3.5

Quoting Richard Braun (2014-09-23 17:23:49)
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 05:09:30PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > For me, the question rather is, what constitutes the releases that we
> > publish?  Some new, exciting features (including considerable bug fixing,
> > code re-writes, re-factoring, and so on), on the one hand, or regular
> > time-based releases on the other (for example, annually).  The former has
> > the process that the new features are added, and then there is a
> > stabilization period where only bug fixes go in, then the release is
> > made, and the latter is basically just a snapshot of the repository at a
> > more or less "random" date.  Due to lack of manpower to maintain a
> > "proper" release process, I see us more on the side of doing snapshots,
> > which we can do any time we like.  Now is a good time, you say?  (I'm not
> > disagreeing -- the previous release having been one year ago.)
> > 
> > Given this, and with our last Hurd release having been 0.5, what would
> > the next version be?  0.5.1?  0.6?  Or, make it obvious that it is just a
> > snapshot, and thus call that GNU Hurd 20140923 or similar?
> I suggest time-based releases, using a 0.x scheme (until the major
> number can be bumped to 1), so a 0.6 release. These would be snapshots
> of the repositories, and 0.x.y releases would include bug fixes,
> probably based on demand, for highly annoying bugs. As mentioned, one
> release every 6-to-12 months should be enough. The goal here is merely
> to provide specific points in time that others can base their work on
> (the Nix-based distribution comes to mind).

My thoughts exactly.  I'll propose updates for the NEWS files.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]