i think the specific schedule isn't the advantage, it's the regularity
of the timebox. There are advantages to longer or shorter iterations,
but having a fixed-length iteration forces prioritization, and,
ideally, there's a cut-off where work-in-progress that "won't make it"
is pruned or side-lined (if modular enough). If I knew there was a
T5 release on N dates (with a nice list of what's been done, what
seems likely to be in, and what could get in if the moons aligned) it
would certainly help me plan things out. (the above notwithstanding
bug-fix patch releases which can be as-needed for critical fixes)
What that schedule is is probably not as big a deal, just that it's
consistent.
Just my 2c.
Christian.
On May 5, 2010, at 12:15 PM, Massimo Lusetti wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Christian Edward Gruber
<christianedwardgru...@gmail.com> wrote:
sometimes it's 2. Having said that OpenBSD releases twice a year
like
clockwork and the regularity of their release really works. Meh.
Hopefully
soon. :)
Really happy to see someone mention it[1]. Even if an OS is something
quite different from Tapestry I guess something good could be learned
from that.
I would like to push Igor to take lead on releasing 5.2.x
Cheers
[1] cvs.openbsd.org/papers/asiabsdcon2009-release_engineering/
mgp00001.html
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tapestry.apache.org
