On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: > After the 0.7 release we decided to shoot for a fixed four-month > release cycle. I think now is a good time to re-evaluate this, and > possibly change to target a six month cycle: > > - Speaking for DataStax, about half our time is spent on maintenance. > Given this, a 3 month window just isn't much time to work on some of > the larger features we have planned. > > - Most of the schedule slip has been in our post-freeze QA period. A > six month cycle would allow a more realistic 6 or even 8 weeks of QA, > while still expanding the dev window. > > - Cassandra has matured enough that there is less low-hanging fruit to > pick; two potential upgrades per year feels better matched to that, > than three. > > - The reality has been that 0.8, 1.0, and 1.1 took about 5, 5.5, and 6 > months, respectively. So in a sense, officially making it a 6-month > cycle would only be acknowledging reality anyway. > > Thoughts?
I agree; +1 -- Eric Evans Acunu | http://www.acunu.com | @acunu
