On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 05:46, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> But my point was, I think it’s a fallacy to tie software quality and
> frequency of releases.
I encounter way too much software today that
> releases frequently, but what it releases is poorly (or not at all) QA'd,
> etc. And it's a nigh
--On Tuesday, January 28, 2020 7:01 PM +0100 Michael Ströder
wrote:
Today releasing is already way too slow. And I'm concerned that a
release policy with additional constraints, as suggested with
odd-/even-numbered releases, will make it even harder to get important
fixes out of the door.
On 1/28/20 6:30 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Tuesday, January 28, 2020 10:08 AM +0100 Michael Ströder
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/27/20 11:17 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
>>> --On Monday, January 27, 2020 10:45 PM +0100 Michael Ströder
>>> wrote:
>>>
On 1/27/20 10:19 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mou
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 02:17:13PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> No, not at all. I would say OpenLDAP has too few releases in a year (only
> 1-2 currently for most years, unfortunately), so having more frequent
> releases for it is probably a good thing. But a piece of software in
> general
--On Tuesday, January 28, 2020 10:08 AM +0100 Michael Ströder
wrote:
On 1/27/20 11:17 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Monday, January 27, 2020 10:45 PM +0100 Michael Ströder
wrote:
On 1/27/20 10:19 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
To me, frequent releases
generally indicate an immat
On 1/27/20 11:17 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Monday, January 27, 2020 10:45 PM +0100 Michael Ströder
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/27/20 10:19 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
>>> To me, frequent releases
>>> generally indicate an immature, unstable, and buggy product. ;)
>>
>> Are you sarcastic her
