Suhail Singh <suhailsingh...@gmail.com> writes: > Assuming my understanding above is correct, wouldn't you agree that > (even) for those individuals what's most important is that there is a > _stable_ and _not-very-outdated_ release available? My (and I believe > Greg's) contention is that following a time-based release process > achieves these objectives more effectively than following a > feature-based release process.
I agree that more frequent releases are necessary, but I don't see much value in “automatic” time-triggered releases. After all, that's what "guix pull" already provides. Our releases should mean something. Also note that Guix itself is a library. I don't think it would be a good idea to inflate the number of releases. Our installer script already offers a way to install the latest untested version of the Guix package manager. -- Ricardo
