
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On 08.11.2011 00:04, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
On 8 November 2011 08:56, Jochen Keil
wrote: How about a release every 6 months? Someone mentioned this already and I think it makes sense. New users would see that the project is under active development. In addition they would be able to get some very recent code without having to fiddle with darcs etc.
I'm not a fan of "let's release just because we need a release every 6 months": I think a feature-based release ("do we have enough changes to warrant a release?") makes more sense, albeit with the uncertainty of a looming deadline to make people consider releasing.
I agree with your point about making a release without changes. However, there were enough changes, patches and bugfixes in the last two years to justify a release. This is also some kind of a chicken-egg problem: Without new releases no new users and developers get attracted hence no changes ultimately leading to stagnation. In a project like xmonad there will be enough changes during six months to have a new release. And if it's only to check if it still compiles and to update the tarballs. It's more important to show that the project is still alive. Personally I'd also vote for release versions like 2011Q1 or 20110301 or something similar (just propagate if it's yyyymmdd or yyyyddmm ;). In case of urgent bugfixes you could still do something like 2011Q1.01 or 20110301.01 etc. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk646hkACgkQtVwvsA+W4CBrMwCfaE3ITdMXvH/aqzdQw0xHnkVj MkEAnjZm9/XOX4nmjUx8MeW1q6q1vpnH =e8ky -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----