> In terms of future planning, that's a conversation I was hoping to start next > week. We need to decide on whether we're doing feature-driven releases or > time-based ones (my preference is time-based, but I'm open to arguments about > that) and then we need to decide on a release cadence, a mechanism for > feature proposal and review, and whether we're going to have long-term stable > branches and if so who would be prepared to maintain them. >
These issues have already been decided on the list. In short - time based releases; what cadence is TBD - largely because we don't completely grok the process around how much work a release will be - and whether a given time frame is practical. Every 3 or 4 months seems to be current consensus, pending finding out if that is practical. The consensus has been that we would provide releases only for showstopper bugs and security issues until the next time-based release.
