incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Brosius <dbros...@mebigfatguy.com>
Subject Re: 6 months a more realistic release cycle?
Date Fri, 20 Apr 2012 18:33:56 GMT
+1

is there any stats on customer adoption of new versions? I'd wonder if 
people generally move to new versions every 4 months, as that could be 
potentially painful for them as well. Given the amount of questions 
regarding older versions still percolating, i'd guess the answer is 
they'd be ok with it too.



On 04/20/2012 01:57 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> After the 0.7 release we decided to shoot for a fixed four-month
> release cycle.  I think now is a good time to re-evaluate this, and
> possibly change to target a six month cycle:
>
> - Speaking for DataStax, about half our time is spent on maintenance.
> Given this, a 3 month window just isn't much time to work on some of
> the larger features we have planned.
>
> - Most of the schedule slip has been in our post-freeze QA period.  A
> six month cycle would allow a more realistic 6 or even 8 weeks of QA,
> while still expanding the dev window.
>
> - Cassandra has matured enough that there is less low-hanging fruit to
> pick; two potential upgrades per year feels better matched to that,
> than three.
>
> - The reality has been that 0.8, 1.0, and 1.1 took about 5, 5.5, and 6
> months, respectively.  So in a sense, officially making it a 6-month
> cycle would only be acknowledging reality anyway.
>
> Thoughts?
>


Mime
View raw message