On 8 Feb 2011, at 17:32, Noah Slater wrote:
>
> On 8 Feb 2011, at 16:14, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>
>> Still, the problem I have is that it seems like there is a tendency to
>> make releases large; it seems like there's little control against devs
>> wanting to add their "one more thing". Particularly for bugfix
>> releases; from 1.0.1 it took almost 6 months for 1.0.2 to get
>> released. In between, there were a little under 100 revisions on the
>> 1.0.x branch, presumably most of those fixing bugs users could
>> actually run into. It seems valuable to me if the community could have
>> gotten some of these fixes sooner.
>
> I need someone else to weigh in on this, but I believe the reason was because of a few
critical bugs that were being worked on. And not, as you suggest, because we were suffering
from a Just One More Thing problem. I'd really need Jan or Chris to comment though as I use
them as a conduit for judging this stuff.
Robert already confirmed this, but I'd like to point out that Noah's analysis
is apt.
--
As for the suggestions for more transparency regarding what new features
are being worked on and when do they land in which version I agree that we
can do better and I'll take on doing some of the legwork here.
I also like the proposed features, but I don't think committing to ship
pony-features without seeing any code is a good idea — just to paint an
extreme, so far nobody suggested that.
Cheers
Jan
--
|