On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:07 PM, Chip Childers > <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: >> Following up on the previous thread about this topic, I'd like to >> propose the following release calendar for our next feature release. >> >> First, note the subject tag of "[ASFCS41]". I'm making 2 assumptions >> right now. First, that we should adopt semantic versioning for our >> versioning scheme. Second, that our next feature release will be >> backward compatible with 4.0.0-incubating. Note that I'm NOT >> discussing bug fix releases below. Shout if you disagree with either >> assumption!
Agree with both of these assumptions. >> >> Before the schedule, here's what I'm looking for people to think about >> when reading this: >> >> * Developers, does a 2 month window to get new stuff into a master for >> the feature release work? Do you think that this is enough time to >> deal with the bugs that come out of testing? I think that 2 month window is deceptive - it's two months for this release, but becomes 4 months (or longer after that). We branch 4.1 on 31 December. So master on 12/31 becomes the master that will become 4.2, 4 months before we branch 4.2 - of course topic branches based on master render much of the time limit discussion moot IMO. >> >> * Docs contributors, does this give us enough time (assuming >> concurrent development of docs for new features as much as possible)? I think it does. I personally don't like the timeline as stated below - and think docs freeze should mirror code freeze personally - and should be developed concurrently. That said it's a personal preference, and I won't argue against the below. >> >> * Translators, can we get translation updates completed in this >> window? Also, should we be planning on getting more of our content >> translated as part of the "feature development" of the next release >> (hoping that we limited the end of release cycle translations to only >> new strings / docs)? We can if it's only the changes IMO - we probably need to do a better job of focusing on getting the initial l10n work done ASAP - if we have to do all of it, the window is not enough.
