After the 0.7 release we decided to shoot for a fixed four-month release cycle. I think now is a good time to re-evaluate this, and possibly change to target a six month cycle:
- Speaking for DataStax, about half our time is spent on maintenance. Given this, a 3 month window just isn't much time to work on some of the larger features we have planned. - Most of the schedule slip has been in our post-freeze QA period. A six month cycle would allow a more realistic 6 or even 8 weeks of QA, while still expanding the dev window. - Cassandra has matured enough that there is less low-hanging fruit to pick; two potential upgrades per year feels better matched to that, than three. - The reality has been that 0.8, 1.0, and 1.1 took about 5, 5.5, and 6 months, respectively. So in a sense, officially making it a 6-month cycle would only be acknowledging reality anyway. Thoughts? -- Jonathan Ellis Project Chair, Apache Cassandra co-founder of DataStax, the source for professional Cassandra support http://www.datastax.com
