On 03/21/2016 10:02 AM, Randy Barlow wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 09:56:04AM -0400, Bryan Kearney wrote:
you guys are thinking a three month time based cadence?
That is the current proposal. We discussed it during a meeting last week
and it was suggested that something between 3 and 6 months would work
well. We can always adjust if we find that it is too short (I doubt
we'll think it's too long ☺).
What do you think?
Sounds good.. I like it.
-- bk
_______________________________________________
Pulp-list mailing list
Pulp-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
