community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phil Steitz <>
Subject Re: How can we support a faster release cadence?
Date Tue, 11 Feb 2014 04:21:04 GMT
On 2/10/14, 3:05 PM, Joseph Schaefer wrote:
> Frankly the notion that there is empirical evidence that
> the standard Apache process is “too slow and buggy” is a straw man.
> I have over a decade of personal anecdotal evidence watching
> Apache projects self-improve and serve the needs of their
> communities rather well.  If anything, I’d say many projects
> go too fast already, especially when they are doing a new
> major release.  A full week’s soak out on the dev list usually
> produces fewer duds in those circumstances.
> I don’t deny that there is literature that says faster releases
> are ‘better’, but that observation lacks a base point relative
> to Apache processes.  Clearly we can all agree that there is 
> a notion of going “too fast”, going “too slow”, and a desire amongst
> some people to “go faster”, but those are entirely subjective
> and seemingly lack any assessment of the consequences of theses
> choices on healthy group dynamics.  After all, Apache projects
> are all in the recruitment business, and I don’t see how speed
> for the sake of speed leads to more activity from newcomers to
> the process.  All I see are comments like how great it is that
> we are giving users fast turnaround on their bugs, but no mention
> of how we are capturing those users attention and converting their
> self-interest into project development.

That is an interesting question that would be tricky but possible to
look at empirically - how does release frequency correlate with user
engagement?  The tricky bit is how to measure user engagement.  Not
just list traffic / JIRAs, but sustained contribution from users of
the software.   In projects dominated by paid developers it might be
hard to identify and track users coming into the community.  I
wonder if anyone has tried to do this.

> On Feb 10, 2014, at 5:47 PM, jan i <> wrote:
>> On 10 February 2014 23:13, Marvin Humphrey <> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:54 PM, jan i <> wrote:
>>>> I strongly believe we (ASF) shall do whatever we can to make sure our
>>>> releases are as stable as possible !
>>> Those who advocate scheduled releases and a fast cadence believe that they
>>> are
>>> doing exactly that.  In fact, the argument goes that bunching up large
>>> amounts
>>> of changes in each release makes for lower quality.
>>> Who's right, you or them?  Are you so sure of your conclusion that you
>>> believe
>>> communities which want to follow these practices must be excluded from the
>>> ASF
>>> because you believe their software will inevitably be low quality?
>> I just made personal observations from my personal experience. I am not the
>> one to judge who is right or wrong. And please remark I did not talk about
>> excluding projects, that would be very wrong !
>> I have worked mainly with international projects with participants from
>> many continents (like many of our projects), and maybe that fact is the
>> root cause of the problems I have experienced. Having to cope with
>> china/europe/US within a 24 hour frame, often lead to the problems I
>> described, and I can only assume it must be a lot harder with volunteers.
>> I simply tried to suggest a middleway that might be (or might not be)
>> acceptable to broader group.
>>> This isn't new, or experimental.  It's a major movement in software
>>> development, years old, with many popular, successful projects on board.
>>> Marvin Humphrey

View raw message