Re: Next Release Planning

On 21/08/12 17:01, Ryan Harper wrote: > * Dave Neary <dneary(a)redhat.com&gt; [2012-08-21 08:42]: >>> I am not sure we must have new features in each release, a release of >>> bug fixes seems also reasonable to me. Why not keep it only time-based >>> release regardless of commitments for new features for the release. >> >> I like giving people good reasons to upgrade, but also good reasons >> to install the current version - and in terms of communication, if >> we say that 3.2 will be "3.1, with lots of bug fixes", and that it >> will be along in 3 months, why would anyone install 3.1? We've just >> said it's a buggy release that will soon be obsoleted anyway. >> >> IMHO, it's better to say "here's what 3.1 does well, here's what 3.2 >> will be able to do that 3.1 doesn't". I'm not suggesting a >> revolution with every release, but one thing which is identifiable >> as "new in 3.2" doesn't seem like a lot to ask. > > Definitely agree with this approach. We always want something new for > the next release. I agree we want something new, the question is what is the release criteria. If I understand the above suggestion correctly If there are not enough new features we won't release in 3 months? I think this is a mistake because there are hundreds of bug fixes pushed into the repository and releasing a more stable version IMO has great value.

For example in Networking we fixed one feature and will probably add one small feature by November, but I know that networking in 3.1 release is very buggy while if you take latest from upstream it is dramatically better, regardless of the features there is a value for releasing in November.