systemml-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: Release cadence
Date Thu, 05 Jan 2017 21:50:08 GMT
+1 for adopting a 1 month release cycle.


Mike Dusenberry

Sent from my iPhone.

> On Jan 5, 2017, at 1:35 PM, Luciano Resende <> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 6:05 AM, Matthias Boehm <>
> wrote:
>> In general, I like the idea of aiming for consistent release cycles.
>> However, every month is just too much, at least for me. There is a
>> considerable overhead associated with each release for end-to-end
>> performance tests, tests on different environments, code freeze for new
>> features, etc. Hence, a too short release cycle would not be "agile" but
>> would actually slow us down. From my perspective, a realistic release
>> cadence would be 2-3 months, maybe a bit more for major releases.
> 2-3 months of release cadence for an open source is probably a long
> stretch, particular for a project that does not have very large set of 3rd
> party dependencies.
> As for some of the overhead issues you mentioned, they are probably easy to
> workaround:
> - code-freeze timeframe can be resolved with branches
> - end-to-end performance regressions can be avoided by better code review,
> and if you were willing to go with 2-3 months without performing these
> tests, we could perform them only for major releases, and proactively
> quickly build a minor release with the patch when a user report any
> performance regression.
> Anyway, I would really like to see SystemML more agile with regards to its
> release process because, as I mentioned before, the release early, release
> often mantra is good to increase community interest, generate more traffic
> to the list as developers discuss the roadmap and release blockers, and
> also enable users to provide feedback sooner on the areas we are developing.
> -- 
> Luciano Resende

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, 7-Bit, 0 bytes)
View raw message