I'm not a huge fan of train releases, as they tend to never quite make
it on time and it always feels a bit artificial timeline anyway. OTOH,
I do see and understand the need of a predictable schedule with a
roadmap attached to it. There are many that need to have at least a
vague idea on what we'r
I think I'm the resident train release advocate so I'm sure my
advocating that model will surprise nobody. I'm not sure I'd go all
the way to Lars' multi-release maintenance model (although it's
definitely something I'm interested in), but there are two big reasons
I wish we were on a train with mo
I'm going to pick on Lars a bit here...
On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2017-09-06T15:23:34, Sage Weil wrote:
> > Other options we should consider? Other thoughts?
>
> With about 20-odd years in software development, I've become a big
> believer in schedule-driven releases. I
On 2017-09-06T15:23:34, Sage Weil wrote:
Hi Sage,
thanks for kicking off this discussion - after the L experience, it was
on my hot list to talk about too.
I do agree that we need predictable releases more than feature-rich
releases. Distributors like to plan, but that's not a reason. However,
