My answer to William Stein's question is double: first of all, I think that sometimes people less involved than being active developers can give suggestions from another perspective, and I hope that those are not considered useless simply because they are given from people which are not contributing (contributing is not just writing code, right?). More than that, I was supposing that this problem of making available for some more time releases that are a little less bug prone, could have been not noticed from people involved with every day development. This is absolutely understandable, but I think that it could be valuable to consider other points of view as well (especially if it could cover some significant part of the users).
My point of view is in complete accordance to what Marshall Hampton said: "Having something like no spkg upgrades or other major revisions as a guideline for double point releases would help too. Maybe it would be not too much extra work to schedule such a release once a year? It could happen unplanned more than that, but it could be a good prelude to a release with more changes. Such a minimal release should be easier than most, so ideally it could happen quite quickly. " As regards Nick Alexander's comment, I do also think that this strategy has been working, but this doesn't mean that it cannot be improved with very little effort. I don't think this would be a great change into developer's mind, but maybe just some fine tuning. I hope this amount of changes can be discussed openly, and that everybody can help in this process. Regards Maurizio On 26 Ott, 20:37, Nick Alexander <ncalexan...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 26-Oct-09, at 11:22 AM, William Stein wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > I wonder why everybody (*) making suggestions has never put together a > > single Sage release themselves, yet everybody who has done significant > > work putting together Sage releases, organizing the web page, mirror > > binaries, etc., has completely refrained from making any suggestions? > > I didn't spend significant time, but I did spend an entire week being > release manager once. > > It is my personal opinion that the system has been working. I was > disappointed that major backwards incompatibility was lost to a double- > point upgrade, but that's infrequent. I opted out of this discussion > because no matter what is agreed to, I don't see anything changing: > Sage is, for better or for worse, driven by developers. All talk of > releases marked stable, etc, doesn't fit with that reality. > > Nick --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
