upgrades are a valid point. No one tests those as a user does.
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com>wrote: > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > As a relative outsider; > > > > any branch that is not released yet is a beta release. Why make it more > > explicit. Wouldn't this add support burdon? Make a branch 'in beta' and > > appoint a guard to make sure no new feartures but only fixes go in (kind > of > > how you are working right now) > > So we do that today. However, a "release" as a -beta will get more user > attention eariler in our release cycle (at least that's my theory). We > need that user attention to help us ensure that upgrades work. > > > > > Daan > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Joe Brockmeier <j...@zonker.net> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2013, at 09:41 AM, Chip Childers wrote: > > > > As a way to get more user feedback on our major feature releases, > what > > > > does everyone think about releasing one or two -beta releases for > each > > > > major feature release? > > > > > > Yes to beta releases. I know that users could test at any time, but we > > > need explicit targets for users that say "now is a good time to test > > > this and give feedback." > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > jzb > > > -- > > > Joe Brockmeier > > > j...@zonker.net > > > Twitter: @jzb > > > http://www.dissociatedpress.net/ > > > >
