cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reinhard Poetz <reinh...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Time based release cylces
Date Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:00:18 GMT
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> Reinhard Poetz skrev:
> 
>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>
>>> Ralph Goers wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have no problem with this release as a first step, but I'd 
>>>> hesitate to even call it 2.2M1.  OTOH, if I had an idea of what our 
>>>> subsequent milestones are this might make more sense to me.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Good point! Now, if you something label milestone or beta people have a
>>> specific expectation. I don't think we meet these expectations, so I
>>> would suggest calling this release alpha.
>>
>>
>> Before we decide what we call the releases exactly I want to draw our 
>> attention to a decision we made long time ago. We agreed that we want 
>> to change to time-based release cycles instead of the feature-driven 
>> releases we had up to now which wasn't helpful in becoming more agile.
>>
>> Taking this into consideration I think we can stick with giving our 
>> releases the "milestone" postfix. The name "milestone" only says that 
>> another period of development is over ("time-boxing").
>>
>> We only need to decide how long the periods between releases should 
>> be. I guess this will highly depend on the module. The most important 
>> modules (e.g. cocoon-core, cocoon-forms, cocoon-template, 
>> cocoon-javaflow, the archetypes, the deployment plugin) should be 
>> released every 4 weeks, other modules every 3 months and there will be 
>> modules that will only be released if required. Additionally we should 
>> coordinate the release cycles so that at least twice a year, we 
>> release everything at the same time (IIUC the Eclipse project wants to 
>> make this happen for their universe with the "Callisto" initiative).
>>
> +1
> 
> I would however suggest that we follow the example from Eclipse and have 
> a milestone release every 6:th week instead of every 4:th. Considering 
> that we probably want to discourage large changes and encourage testing 
> the week before each release it gives us the possibility to develop 5/6 
> of the time instead of 3/4.

I don't have a strong opinion on the length of the period as long as we don't 
count in years ;-)

so yes, every 6th week is fine for me.

-- 
Reinhard Pötz           Independent Consultant, Trainer & (IT)-Coach 

{Software Engineering, Open Source, Web Applications, Apache Cocoon}

                                        web(log): http://www.poetz.cc
--------------------------------------------------------------------

	

	
		
___________________________________________________________ 
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden: http://mail.yahoo.de

Mime
View raw message