Urg! Urp! That was a typo-- I meant 3 months, as per previous discussion. Sorry! Trying to do too many things at once on a Friday.
--- A. Soroka The University of Virginia Library > On Apr 7, 2017, at 12:17 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 07/04/17 14:52, A. Soroka wrote: >> I'm fine with trying for regular x.x.0 releases, but I would add two >> provisos: >> >> 1) We should have a calendar as well, particularly while we have a single >> codebase with two sync'd release products. In other words, we should do a >> release when either enough development has accumulated to justify a minor >> release or six months have passed. Otherwise we are waiting for arbitrary >> unscheduled work to complete to be able to release. > > Previously, we agreed a release every 3 months (kind unspecified), having > moved from every 6 months. > > How about aim for a release every 3 months, with the option to decide to > stretch that out if there isn't enough activity to make it worthwhile. > > (If 3 months is a bit of a stretch, 4 months.) > > Of course, a release can happen at any time in a "as needed, as resourced" > basis.
