On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 5:55 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think we should move the current trunk off and call it generics-RnD. >> >> Then we should copy 3.2 over to trunk (or maybe 3.3, I seem to recall >> that prior to merging the generics in we had a 3.3 ready for release). >> >> We then release 3.3. >> >> Then we start 3.4. We genericize some tiny part of it in a binary >> compat way. Release. >> 3.5. Genericize a bit more. Release. >> 3.6... etc. >> >> We use generics-RnD code, pulling it over (and maybe deleting when >> considered happy). >> >> Somewhere around about 3.28 we can decide to start on 4.0, pulling >> over the remainder of generics-RnD. >> >> Hen > > Yes, release early, release often. > > The only issue I can see is the time suck aspect of RERO. In [lang], > it seems we've made an unwritten agreement to release once a month, > that's pretty aggressive based on history. Are we talking about > something like this here?
There's no agreement on monthly releases - I'm being obtuse and experimenting :) My view is that the time suck aspect of RERO is the problem, not RERO. We can improve the time, and discover from users if there is a thing as too-often. A huge amount of my time in RMing is remembering how to RM and building up the energy to deal with it. If you release a lot then that becomes routine and the only issue is the voting and analysis - which should increasingly focus on 'which issues' and less on the quality of our packaging. Everything that Lang 3.0 was, Collections 4.0 (or 3.5) will be and 10 times more. We will navel gaze and spend ages getting a release out sometime in early 2014 (and that's optimistic). We need incremental successes to drive us to a 4.0. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
