Jeroen Demeyer <jdeme...@cage.ugent.be> writes:
>> Sage 4.7.2 was
>> released in last November, Sage 4.8 in January, and now it is March
>> and Sage 5.0 might still need some care (especially because there are
>> explicit goals for it, like "OS X 10.7 compatibilty" and "90% doctest
>> coverage", none of which is reached yet to my knowledge). So there are
>> (at least) two months between consecutive Sage versions currently. (I
>> do not know of any plans for some intermediate Sage 4.8.1 release.)
>>
>> If there was one (or more) Sage release per month, say roughly "every
>> 100 tickets at the latest", then I believe all the problems you
>> mention in your first post were much smaller, maybe gone altogether.
>>
>> I'm well aware that one main "bottleneck" in current Sage develpment
>> is with the integrator's task(s), and that everything that helps the
>> integrator to get the job done better/quicker/easier helps the overall
>> Sage project immediately --- but maybe an increase in (at least
>> doubling) the frequency of official Sage releases has more advantages
>> than disadvantages even from the integrator's point of view ("release
>> early, release often")?
>>
>> Jeroen, what do you think about this?
>
> * The main bottleneck in Sage releasing is testing. It takes a lot of
> time to test stuff on the Buildbot and we need some time during the
> "release candidate" phase for other people to test Sage.
As for the patchbot, I thought Robert Bradshaw just said in another
thread that the patchbot is overflowing with spare CPU cycles. Why does
it take so long? Do you test each ticket after merging it, sequentially?
> * With your proposal, I think the average "merge latency" (time between
> patch getting positive_review and being released) would increase.
> People don't like that.
Wait, with a faster release cycle, it would take *longer* for people's
code to be released? Why?
> * As for sage-5.0: releasing a "sage-4.8.1" or "sage-4.9" now would be
> very confusing. I'm in favour of releasing sage-5.0 soon, regardsless
> of William's goals.
+1.
All in all, I don't think it will make a huge amount of difference if we
speed up the release cycle. We should have a rolling release cycle for
developers, really, and stables for everyone else, not these development
releases. But that will take some doing.
-Keshav
----
Join us in #sagemath on irc.freenode.net !
--
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
