+1
is there any stats on customer adoption of new versions? I'd wonder if
people generally move to new versions every 4 months, as that could be
potentially painful for them as well. Given the amount of questions
regarding older versions still percolating, i'd guess the answer is
they'd be ok with it too.
On 04/20/2012 01:57 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
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?
