On 08/14/2011 02:30 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:>> Maybe something more like:
2 months development
-rc0 goes out (master enters soft feature freeze)
Why an rc0 at this point? 0.15-rc0 was in a bad shape because it was
forked just after heavy development (ga etc).
It could be called -beta1 instead of -rc0. We just need to tag it with
something.
I'd nominate release
candidates only after soft freeze, then there would not be any major
changes. Though a rc0 could attract testing efforts from outside and
for those, the earlier the better.
2 weeks development in master, stabilization and careful consideration of
new features
-rc1 goes out (master enters hard feature freeze)
1 week stabilization
-rc2 goes out
1 week stabilization
-rc3 goes out, -rc3 becomes release
So at this point master would be released? What's the difference in
time between rc3 and release?
Ideally, nothing. Having an -rc3 is just a conservative mechanism to
make sure that there is an absolute final call for testing before teh
release.
Overall this would only give a duty cycle of 67%. For 4 weeks total
freeze, the development would need to be 4 months for an 80% duty
cycle. But I think this version could work too.
Yeah, that's more or less what I'm proposing for 1.0 :-)
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
I think a shorter cycle could work better long term. I think it needs to be
done as part of the master branch though and I'd wait until 1.1 to implement
it.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
