+1 On Jul 28, 2013 2:28 PM, <t...@wescottdesign.com> wrote:
> In my personal opinion I'd rather have stability, fewer bugs, and a > supported product than I would like to have new bells and whistles. I'm > not sure what you put into a release vs. maintenance, but I like the > current feature set just fine and would rather see it working so well that > I never see another bug, rather than having some new look and feel every > half-year. > > I vote for fewer releases and the quality that comes from a relaxed > schedule. > > On 2013-07-28 10:16, Matthew Barnes wrote: > >> The Evolution team is considering moving from our traditional 6 month >> release cycle to a 12 month release cycle starting next March, and is >> soliciting feedback from the user community. >> >> This is partly motivated by the team's desire for a longer development >> window in which to merge and test major changes, but moreover it's to >> provide better support to the user community. >> >> The team's manpower is still severely limited to where we can only >> realistically support one stable branch at a time and still manage to >> get any kind of significant development work done for the next major >> release. >> >> The problem is -- even for distros that also make semi-annual releases >> like Fedora and Ubuntu -- because of the lag between an upstream release >> and a distro release, users are often upgrading to an Evolution release >> that's either near the end of its upstream support window or is already >> abandoned by developers. >> >> That's frustrating for everyone. Developers want everyone using the >> latest (and in our opinion, best) release, and users don't like waiting >> until their next distro upgrade to get their Evolution issues resolved. >> >> So to compensate, the proposal is basically to make a major release >> annually instead of semi-annually, and to support each release for 12 >> months instead of 6. That gives users a better chance to sync up with >> developers for at least half the year, and hopefully get their issues >> resolved quicker. >> >> We intend to synchronize our annual major release with GNOME's spring >> release, and continue releasing stable updates and development snap- >> shots throughout the year at the same pace as we do currently: about >> once a month for each branch. So we'll still hold to the "release >> early, release often" principle. >> >> You can peek at the developer thread on this starting from here: >> https://mail.gnome.org/**archives/evolution-hackers/** >> 2013-July/msg00004.html<https://mail.gnome.org/archives/evolution-hackers/2013-July/msg00004.html> >> >> There seems to be a consensus in favor of this policy change on the >> developer side, although we're still working out the finer details of >> scheduling, versioning, etc. >> >> What do you guys think? Would this be helpful? >> >> Matthew Barnes >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> evolution-list mailing list >> evolution-list@gnome.org >> To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... >> https://mail.gnome.org/**mailman/listinfo/evolution-**list<https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list> >> > ______________________________**_________________ > evolution-list mailing list > evolution-list@gnome.org > To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... > https://mail.gnome.org/**mailman/listinfo/evolution-**list<https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list> >
_______________________________________________ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
