Release timing

Stuart Donaldson stu at
Sun Jan 23 04:53:31 UTC 2005

Christopher Hicks wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, Gervase Markham wrote:
>> I'm suggesting that we revisit that logic. One can make an argument 
>> for "releases every X months", for most sane values of X, but I can't 
>> see an argument for "freezes every X months". How is the date of a 
>> freeze important? Surely it's the release date you are trying to hit 
>> that's the important thing.
> Having the freeze dates be something that people know from remember 
> when it happened last year seems more important than exactly when we 
> release to the world.  As long as there's been a release in the last 
> year the user is going to feel like we're making progress, but the 
> developers care about the exact freeze data because presumably they 
> have something that they want in before the freeze.
At the risk of being redundant, I will try to restate my earlier comment.

I believe it would be best if Bugzilla would Freeze X months after 
release.  This gives X months of active development, and allows for 
releases approximately every X+1 month.

You don't find yourself running up against a fixed release date, causing 
artificial pressure.  (If this were a company with all paid developers, 
rather than the large number of volunteers, the fixed release dates 
could work.  But figure out why you're doing it.)

More information about the developers mailing list