Hi Nikita, I've thought similar for a while, but never brought it up.
At a minimum, a shorter release cycle would allow more release announcements and give the appearance of a very active project. Cayenne is stable and mature, so it isn't in a state of rapid development turmoil with frequent releases, so despite activity, it might appear stagnant to many. Also, I think much more focused releases (a single feature or feature set, plus bug fixes) would be better conceptually for many to grapple when wanting to upgrade. Maybe we need a better roadmap? Thanks, mrg On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 6:50 AM, Nikita Timofeev <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Wanted to share my thoughts about our release policy. > > I think it will be better for Cayenne to reduce scopes of future > releases, as not many users are ready to use milestone or even beta > releases. At the same time we can't create final release if there are > a lot of new things, because of long feedback cycle. > Good example of this problem is 4.0 version that started 5 years ago > (as a 3.2 back then) and still not finished. Even Java itself released > faster now :) > > As for nearest plans, 4.1 already have some nice features (like > field-based data objects or recently added completely new dbimport > interface in Modeler), so I think we can target it to feature freeze > after M2. > > And we can already start to push new tasks into next (4.2?) version or > even think about several versions ahead. > > So any thoughts about overall shorter release cycles or 4.1, 4.2 release > plans? > > -- > Best regards, > Nikita Timofeev >
