I don't have a problem saying something like "we will attempt to release at least twice per year." I don't think it would be wise to say, "we will have a release on 1/1 and 7/1 every year."
Release early! Release often! Have 12 releases a year if you want. Just don't promise them. On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Sébastien Brisard <sebastien.bris...@m4x.org> wrote: > Hello, > maybe we could mix both approaches. > > Following James, releases could be feature-based, using the JIRA > system. If after 3 months, the goal is reached, we could release. > > However, as Gilles suggested we could at least do our best to at least > try and release twice a year. This means that about a month before the > "deadline", we could all review the present state of the library, and > decide what should be done to get it released. That's what happened in > 3.0: there was an urge for a release, so some feature requests were > just postponed, and we all tried to clear up the most urgent JIRA > tickets. > > As for working both on 3.1 and 4.0, I'm all for it (means I'll > probably be struggling again with svn, though...). > > Sébastien > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
