>> 5) Checking compile and building for the few supported systems (sometimes days of delay and looping back to step 1). > >If it would be easier to create a new release, you could release a -RC version and wait for feedback. So finding a fast way to create releases would fix that point for large parts.
This is one of the major bugbears I have with Radiance releases. I've never seen a single software package which has only HEAD or major releases available because it just doesn't work as we've seen here. Releasing betas and/or release candidates from the HEAD would allow people to test using a known package & would make people a lot more likely to build & test before a release. Also the bake time for betas and/or release candidates give you time to fix known issues & the pressure to make sure everything works for release should be eased by this. The down side is that you'd either need to create a release branch for each release which from what I've heard isn't easy in CVS (I'm used to Perforce where everything is easy) or lock HEAD until a release is ready. If you're dead set against releasing patches/minor updates such as 4.0.1 etc then betas/release candidates are the only workable solution that I can see. Palbinder Sandher Software Deployment & IT Administrator T: +44 (0) 141 945 8500 F: +44 (0) 141 945 8501 http://www.iesve.com **Design, Simulate + Innovate with the <Virtual Environment>** Integrated Environmental Solutions Limited. Registered in Scotland No. SC151456 Registered Office - Helix Building, West Of Scotland Science Park, Glasgow G20 0SP Email Disclaimer _______________________________________________ Radiance-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
