Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7CCB310F83 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 16:13:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 49045 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jul 2013 16:13:20 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 48959 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jul 2013 16:13:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 48951 invoked by uid 99); 3 Jul 2013 16:13:17 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 16:13:16 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-ie0-f173.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username nslater, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 16:13:16 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f173.google.com with SMTP id k13so850236iea.18 for ; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 09:13:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=Al01FFIkzPLdZ8azM6LKzcSbFyGGwZ36o4eDb/x6LpQ=; b=S413AWxNyRo/cJIEg5kVIPxnWYJZ/asLuRwGY2I9K8h02x8bAbuhbAI/vBmcedvfMH 4pp9fizfMdefLFQ9Bxm8jymb4J6HExgaR0csbWrGjZFGz1CMPNJg5DvFnhE/BiZiSuff 7E+mSYRL20m3qjUckQv3xweZHMJeVqv/TTzLuVhWaSKtBcBKi96FSPiUbhu92XaqsYhE 4dtaJKxVt+gMBVT2DAJK7ZgpjOwD6os0/f5AFZ+IERWGKW2Ir4YGSOgp9yxlgZuayUXS aQ6C9+iFzCqFWWeKw/ztS8W9ET+yPqLqiP2lG/hRQoSerL/9RHBJEJWlX0KFDQ6zsYap HTPw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.42.113.8 with SMTP id a8mr898863icq.71.1372867995856; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 09:13:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.29.2 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 09:13:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [178.250.115.206] Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 17:13:15 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: [RELEASE][PROPOSAL] New release schedule From: Noah Slater To: "dev@couchdb.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1130c3a837805604e09dbd9d X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmX4rmk+lLkzunlKCYCqbXPGwIo54Z7PR/oHXjJIYj8PUEIO/Jc8jW7/HxjyRURwZFU5TIT --001a1130c3a837805604e09dbd9d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hey folks, I've been doing a bit of thinking about the way we handle our new timed based released, and I've come to the conclusion that doing a vote on the 3rd Tuesday of every month is a flawed approach. There are delays in testing, and oftentimes multiple vote rounds. This will consistently result in the situation where we are doing the actual release several weeks behind schedule. The result being that, according to the calendar, I would be doing another vote perhaps a week, or even days after the release. This clearly makes no sense. So, I am proposing that we attempt to do a new release four weeks after the last release. i.e. We released 1.3.1 1 week ago, so I am proposing that we attempt another release in three weeks. This means that even if it takes us several weeks to do the next one, we will then set a 4 week timer at whatever point we manage to make the successful release. I believe this properly accounts for the fact that we are a volunteer project, and that sometimes, things just take a while. But it also keeps us on a time based schedule. One other change I am proposing: I think that in three weeks, we should cut whatever is ready. If that means a major point revision, so be it. Minor, so be it. Patch, so be it. Whatever is ready. No artificial "patch release", "patch release", "feature release" dance. Assuming nobody objects, or has a better way of doing it, I will proceed with this idea. You can consider this notice that I plan to start a release vote thread on the Tuesday the 24th of July. So you have three weeks to get your features into master. Thanks, -- NS --001a1130c3a837805604e09dbd9d--