2013/4/3 Imre Kaloz <ka...@openwrt.org>: > On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 10:45:01 +0200, Rafał Miłecki <zaj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > <snip> > > >>> >>> 3.3 has been chosen as AA was meant to be released those days.. >> >> >> Well, so it seems we assumed two things: >> 1) AA quick release, according to the plan >> 2) BB release quick enough to replace AA before 3.3 gets EOL >> >> I'm afraid both assumptions were wrong and shouldn't happen. Privately >> I wonder if it's good idea to release AA at all, if it's going to be >> using old 3.3 kernel with possible security bugs. >> > > 1) I wanted to lead the AA release, but life had different plans. blogic > leads that now, he knows the plan > 2) BB wasn't even on the table back then, I've renamed trunk when the others > decided to branch AA. > > Privately I wasn't a fan of branching, ever, as it always caused similar > results to the current state. IMHO when we want a release, trunk should calm > down (!=freeze) and stabilize, and branching should happen only at the time > of releasing that version. > > I wanted predefined 6-monthly release cycles for years now, while others > think a release should bring something new all the time.
I'm not going to reinvent the wheel analyzing how hard it is to say how many features make it worth releasing new version. A lot of big (and actively developed) projects are using cycling releases now (including Linux kernel). And come one, OpenWrt is getting a lot of patches almost daily. I like 6-monthly (of similar) release cycle, it's just a matter of fact of finding some ppl leading that releases. > IMHO AA should be released asap, just to get over it, and BB should follow > it shortly. Agree. We just should make sure to use some LTS kernel. Let's release AA, pick up the first LTS kernel and use it for BB release. Sound simple, doesn't it? ;) It always does ;) -- Rafał _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
