On 03/11/2013 05:07 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi Ayal,
On 03/09/2013 10:31 PM, Ayal Baron wrote:
General advice based on my experience with oVirt: * I recommend a 6 month cadence with ~4 months feature development and ~2 months release preparation
<snip>
* Make regular point releases (alpha, beta 1, beta 2, RC1, whatever they're called) before and after a release. I'm looking forward to 3.2.1!
if we have a 6 month release cycle, do you envision 1-2 point releases? e.g. 3.2.1 2 months after 3.2 and 3.2.2 2 months after that and then after another couple of months 3.3?
I was thinking we could lower the cost of making a point release to the point where we could have a release every month... like this:
February: 3.2.0 released March: 3.2.1 released - contains fixes for important issues discovered post-release in 3.2.0 - in the meantime, feature proposal and prioritisation (and development) continues on the trunk April: 3.2.2 released - only if there are significant bug fixes or new translations May: 3.3.alpha1 released - in-progress work, contains some early features, aimed for testing to identify features that need additional work early. Release branch is made now. June: 3.3.alpha2 released - corresponds to feature freeze. At this stage, incomplete features should no longer be committed. Work can start on testing, integration testing, bug day July: 3.3.beta1 released - Corresponds to UI and string freeze - translations and docs, and release notes, should be underway already, but can hit full speed. Testing and bug fixing continues
August: 3.3.0 released
The only release that should take longer than a couple of hours to put out is 3.3.0 - the other releases are a tag in the source code, and a pointer to specific nightly builds.
Cheers, Dave.
+1 on release roadmap. I was lacking some additional items on the release process of 3.2 and i would like to bring it up for 3.3: -ovirt functional dev group involvement -representative on weekly meetings -communication on when a new feature is in the code (nightly builds) - to engage early testing from the community -wiki page with contacts/maintainers, features roadmap and status, howto, etc. -lack of tracking/monitoring priority bugs/common issues -weekly meetings has been ran by very few people mostly by doing monologues- we might want to change the agenda of the meetings. I think the area coming from all above items is the need to improve communication between developers-> project PM ->community Thanks, Moran.