Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> Before we decide what we call the releases exactly I want to draw our
> attention
> to a decision we made long time ago. We agreed that we want to change to
> time-based release cycles instead of the feature-driven releases we had up to
> now which wasn't helpful in becoming more agile.
>
> Taking this into consideration I think we can stick with giving our releases
> the
> "milestone" postfix. The name "milestone" only says that another period of
> development is over ("time-boxing").
>
> We only need to decide how long the periods between releases should be. I
> guess
> this will highly depend on the module. The most important modules (e.g.
> cocoon-core, cocoon-forms, cocoon-template, cocoon-javaflow, the archetypes,
> the
> deployment plugin) should be released every 4 weeks, other modules every 3
> months and there will be modules that will only be released if required.
> Additionally we should coordinate the release cycles so that at least twice a
> year, we release everything at the same time (IIUC the Eclipse project wants
> to
> make this happen for their universe with the "Callisto" initiative).
>
Now, while this really sounds great I fear it's very very difficult. It
was a hugh effort for the Callisto team (and the participating eclipse
projects) to get where they are today. And it's really time/resource
consuming - and as we are short of time/resources anyway, the only way
this would be possible is to automate the release and simply "do it"
after each time frame. But I don't think that this is a good idea as
there is no way to determine the quality of the relese.
So, in general I agree that we should try it, but not with the cost of
quality and tested releases.
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG
http://www.s-und-n.de
http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
