Eeek! Maybe I'm weird on this one, but I'd much rather have a small
number of big releases than a continuous upgrade cycle.
Every time I change a core library, it's a regression testing
nightmare. Even if nothing at all breaks, I still have to go back and ensure
that fact. I can deal with changing tapestry jars every year or so and not
feel bad about it, but anything significantly faster than than (like monthly
or quarterly releases) would make my life much harder, not easier.
The only way I could see that sort of release cycle working is if
Howard could *guarantee* that the monthly releases never, ever, broke
backward compatibility. That way I could skip the regression tests, but
frankly that's a huge pile of turd for Howard to have to shovel as it's not
really practical. I can't think of a single OS project that can make such a
guarantee (even hibernate breaks something of mine virtually every time they
release).
--- Pat
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephane Decleire [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 4:07 PM
> To: Tapestry users
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving beyond the "rewind cycle" in Tapestry 4.1
>
> That's a great idea !
> We could have a continuous upgrade process instead of a huge amount of
> modifications on Q3 2006.
>
> Stephane
>
> Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi wrote:
>
> > Howard, can't these major changes be wrapped up in single point
> releases?
> >
> > 4.1: Delete the rewind cycle
> > 4.2: Rework component interfaces..
> >
> > and such??
> >
> > Q3 2006 seems like a lot! Almost a year..
> >
>
> --
> Stéphane Decleire
>
> 05 56 57 99 20
> 06 63 78 69 06
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
