New release cycle; was: Re: [dev] Fwd: HEAD

[Chuck Hagenbuch]

Quoting Eric Rostetter <eric.rostetter at physics.utexas.edu>:

> I'm not convinced of your arguments.  But that aside, I'll propose
> another way to do it -- make a new branch.  Have the releng branches, the 
> HEAD branch, and another temporary branch that is, for lack of a better 
> name, the feature-frozen-debugging-soon-to-be-released branch...  When it 
> is released, it is moved/renamed to the new releng_* branch.  That way we
> can still have the current stable branch, the current development branch, 
> and the soon-to-be-released branch, and they won't interfer with each 
> other.  In a sense, this would be a "beta" branch.
> 
> Just some ideas, kind of the "devil's advocate" line of thought...
> No offense to anyone intended...

None taken; hopefully none will be given.

Personally, I am spread thin enough right now that I have a really have a
hard time keeping up with anything other than HEAD. I have to keep up with
HEAD, because the consulting jobs I've done have involved writing new
functionality using it, and the stuff I need for myself involves shared
tasklists, etc.

We have something like 30 applications now, and I try to keep involved in
and at least roughly on top of all of them, and I'd like to do more. I
couldn't handle 3 branches. As much as I focus just on HEAD now, that would
push me to do it more.

This is *not* an ideal, but I feel pretty strongly that it's, for me, a
reality. If we had a dedicated release team that could keep track of this...
great. But it's not something that *I* will be able to help with.

-chuck

--
Charles Hagenbuch, <chuck at horde.org>
"... It is not more light we need, but more warmth! We die of cold, not of
darkness. It is not the night that kills, but the frost." - Miguel de Unamuno