httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ryan Bloom" <>
Subject RE: 2.0.38 is done
Date Mon, 17 Jun 2002 13:18:27 GMT
> From: Aaron Bannert []
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 05:56:23AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > No.  We have made a release.  We can offer the patch in the patches
> > directory, and move on.  If we roll another release, we are
> > telling users that they can't expect releases to be valid for any
> > of time.  Make this a GA release on Unix and a beta on Windows.  If
> > release every two days, you are removing the incentive to upgrade,
> > because there is always a new release on the way.
> I totally disagree. I think by making less than one release a month
> we are doing a huge disservice to the would-be testers out there who
> would love to live on the bleeding edge and give us valuable feedback
> on our software.

People who want to live on the bleeding edge should be using CVS, not a
release.  The releases are for those people who specifically don't want
to live on the bleeding edge, but who want to wait until we have ironed
out as much as possible.

> I think we should be making releases every time we feel we have
> bugs or added new features, and we shoudn't be holding back a release
> for any reason, be that "just one more thing" or "we just made a
> If we release more often then we reduce the time our users will have
> wait to get the fixes from bugs in earlier releases.

If you release software every three days, you aren't giving people
enough time to test the first one before you have a second.  There MUST
be a balance struck between getting releases into people's hands and
overwhelming people with the number of releases.  Very early on, the
magic number of 1 week was thrown about when discussing this release
model.  Whether that number is correct or not is up for debate, but
there must be a minimum amount of time between rolls.


View raw message