Hi Greg, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> writes:
> My opinions on the project release cadence are of no greater > consequence than the update frequency or inclusion of any individual > package by a contributor or team. Most of this GCD can simply be > merged into the project documentation, which can then be updated with > a new commit rather than requiring a new GCD. By codifying an annual > release process we actually restrict the number of releases! And what > if the June deadline is missed? If these are mere guidelines then what > are we voting on? We’re deliberating on a release process. And I think that’s no small feat. Previously, releases were handled by long-time contributors; some of the process is documented but most of it is insider knowledge. Overall it was arguably not very legible, particularly the “when” and the “what”. I believe this GCD clarifies all this, meaning that contributors more clearly know what to expect and how to contribute. Thanks, Ludo’.
