On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:34 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 5 August 2013 22:32, janI <j...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> When I consider what I hear in the "real" world, I would prefer a fast
> >> release, solving the most important issues. We always have the
> possibility
> >> to make a 4.02 if really needed.
> >
> >
> > x.0.x releases monthly are the way to go. I think LibreOffice really
> > got this right. If you do this, the users will be happier because they
> > anticipate happiness in the *near* future, not a year from now.
> >
>
> I don't think LO has this figured out at all. Saw this on Twitter
> today, for example:
>
> https://twitter.com/camerongray1515/status/364393046768484353/photo/1
>
> The goal should be moving from stability to stability through a
> disciplined process, not speed for its own sake.
>
+1 on this opinion...
>
> Having large, "anything goes" releases are fine, provided we dedicate
> enough time for testing. And small, carefully controlled releases are
> fine, since they don't require as much testing. But frequent,
> uncontrolled releases, without enough testing, I don't like what that
> leads to.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
-- Jon Bon Jovi
