My "problem" is that we already have a basic roadmap of things we'd like to get into each release up to 1.0. 1.0 is a big thing in the *nix world, so it seems like once we get there we should have most of these things accomplished.
If we wait and put out 0.7 next month with 2 new features, then 0.8 two months later with another 3 we end up at 1.0 a lot sooner than I think most of us would like. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Michael Harris <[email protected]>wrote: > > 2009/5/1 Scott Merrill <[email protected]>: > > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Michael Harris wrote: > >> The stable releases are for people who want things stable. Upgrading > >> is a pain. We have an extra responsibility with minor point releases > >> to try our hardest not to introduce new bugs. That means we should > >> keep what's included in a minor point release to an absolute minimum. > >> I know it's nice to get fixes for things out to the community, but > >> imho that's not enough to warrant inclusion in a point release. > > > > I think there's a slippery slope here. Some things merit inclusion in > > a point release because they demonstrably improve the overall quality > > of the product. Things like spelling corrections, removal of cruft > > (unused images, etc). > > > > Other minor or trivial bug fixes are worth considering because they > > improve the user experience without jeopardizing a functioning > > installation. I don't think such minor bugfixes should trigger a minor > > point release; but to not fix little things along the way seems a > > disservice to our users. > > I think the slippery slope is in the other direction. If we have three > concrete criteria each fix included in a minor point release can > easily be tested against them. The trivial bug fix criteria is much > more blurry, and I think we'll either end up arguing about whether > things really are trivial or committing things that aren't. > > 2009/4/30 Chris Meller <[email protected]>: > > Release early, release often. > > I wholeheartedly agree - except for minor point releases. Since these > are security or data loss releases, these are the things we want > people to go "OMG, there's a minor point release, I really need to > upgrade to that!" The last thing we need is for people to get jaded > and not upgrade them, potentially leaving Habari installations with > known security holes. > > But, no-one has leapt to agree with me, so it seems I'm in the > minority in seeing minor point releases that way. Sobeit. > > > -- > Michael C. Harris, School of CS&IT, RMIT University > http://twofishcreative.com/michael/blog > IRC: michaeltwofish #habari > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/habari-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
