s been a supporter of the former, even though some of my ideas to
tackle it haven't always been popular with all the devs.
Ged.
From: ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] On
Behalf Of Olaf Siejka
Sent: 11 October 2010 10:25
To: ReactOS Development List
I am sorry to point out that our devs (no pointing out) still fail to do
something as simple as observing their commit on buildbot if it causes any
problem. I`m not even talking about things more complicated, like not
commiting again without first checking if previous commit was built fine.
Also, d
pment List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] ReactOS development cycle
I do agree with Wax in general, that any cycle will be ok
provided that we can stick to it.
Three month cycle would be (more/less):
- 6 weeks of pure development (and first 4 weeks - release
of the x-1 version)
evelopment List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] ReactOS development cycle
I do agree with Wax in general, that any cycle will be ok provided that we
can stick to it.
Three month cycle would be (more/less):
- 6 weeks of pure development (and first 4 weeks - release of the x-1
version);
-
It does sound quite short to me too. I would be quite surprised if one can even stick to this cycle. Remember that this is an operating system after all.On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 19:14:17 +1100, Olaf Siejka wrote:I do agree with Wax in general, that any cycle will be ok provided that we can stick to
I do agree with Wax in general, that any cycle will be ok provided that we
can stick to it.
Three month cycle would be (more/less):
- 6 weeks of pure development (and first 4 weeks - release of the x-1
version);
- 6 weeks of stabilising trunk, bugfixing, plus some finishing work on
features that
os.org] On
Behalf Of Olaf Siejka
Sent: 11 October 2010 08:08
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] ReactOS development cycle
We tried 3-month cycle and it simply doesnt work, unless you know a way to
discipline devs.
2010/10/10 Ged Murphy
I still think you should stick to a 3 month
A 3 month cycle is ridiculous and IMO unnecessary. I think it will be too
much work on the release engineers, and very little (if any) actual
development work will end up taking place, and things will be rushed with
hack fixes and what not, where time could have been better spent coming up
We tried 3-month cycle and it simply doesnt work, unless you know a way to
discipline devs.
2010/10/10 Ged Murphy
> I still think you should stick to a 3 month cycle.
> If you want a stable tree and good exposure, you need to release often.
> It hasn't gone to plan in the past but I think things
I still think you should stick to a 3 month cycle.
If you want a stable tree and good exposure, you need to release often.
It hasn't gone to plan in the past but I think things should start to
stabalize going forward.
6 months is definitely not an option IMO.
Ged.
On 10 October 2010 12:00, Ale
age -
> *From:* Olaf Siejka
> *To:* ReactOS Development List
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 09, 2010 3:14 PM
> *Subject:* [ros-dev] ReactOS development cycle
>
> I think its a good time to discuss current development cycle.
> It become clear to me, that there is no way
I'd vote for a six months release cycle. ...in case we can actually enforce it.
- Original Message -
From: Olaf Siejka
To: ReactOS Development List
Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 3:14 PM
Subject: [ros-dev] ReactOS development cycle
I think its a good time to di
I support 4 month cycle, the 3 months turned out to be unrealistic,
while 6 months is too long time between releases (we are speaking
about normal development, not kernel rewrites which have to take that
long time).
WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.
On Oct 9, 2010, at 5:14 PM, Olaf Siejka wrote:
I th
I approve of anything that we will stick to. A six month cycle sounds good.
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Olaf Siejka wrote:
> I think its a good time to discuss current development cycle.
> It become clear to me, that there is no way we can currently adhere to 3
> months development cycle. I
I think its a good time to discuss current development cycle.
It become clear to me, that there is no way we can currently adhere to 3
months development cycle. Its pointless to stick to something we managed to
succeed only once or twice.
Agreeing with the fact we do need releases, for various reas
15 matches
Mail list logo
