From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Move to a cadence release model? Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 14:32:22 +0000 Message-ID: <20151110143222.GG2626@acm.fritz.box> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447170138 8293 80.91.229.3 (10 Nov 2015 15:42:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:42:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs developers To: John Yates Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 10 16:42:12 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwB3h-0003Ds-O9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 16:42:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33078 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwB3h-000201-JZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 10:42:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35820) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zw9wO-00030S-14 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 09:30:33 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zw9wK-0001ho-NP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 09:30:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.muc.de ([193.149.48.3]:28248) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zw9wK-0001go-Ds for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 09:30:28 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 63080 invoked by uid 3782); 10 Nov 2015 14:30:26 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p5B14697B.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [91.20.105.123]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:30:25 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 3864 invoked by uid 1000); 10 Nov 2015 14:32:22 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x X-Received-From: 193.149.48.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:193864 Archived-At: Hello, John. On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 08:57:07AM -0500, John Yates wrote: > With a new master at the helm and various changes being contemplated I > would like to see some discussion of moving to a cadence release model. I suspect that here "some" is going to be somewhat of an understatement. ;-) > I have been impressed with open source projects that have made the change. > I am now employed at Mathworks which ships mission critical software to > very large enterprise customers on a 6 month cadence. > The biggest shift I see is away from wondering when the correct collection > of features, bug fixes, whatever have been accumulated to whether those > that have been accumulated are individually sufficiently cooked to ship. > Developers feel less urge to squeeze a not fully baked feature into the > current release when they can count on the next opportunity being only a > cadence interval in the future. On our current release model, we typically have a pre-test phase which is longer than 6 months. This would have to be compressed, somehow (assuming we retain the concept of pre-test). > /john -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).