Re: Release 2.12 - 3.0

[Justin Sherrill <justin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This is where I saw "I TOLD you so!" and quietly stare at everyone with a smug look, cause I had proposed yearly release cycles just last month.  Please don't smack me for it.

Seriously, though:

If we continue to test master relentlessly - which several people are already doing - we should be able to identify any problems from the new code relatively quickly.

I had already put together "release candidate" versions of 2.12, since almost all bugs tied to 2.12 were cleared.  In fact, I already have a complete pkgsrc-2011Q3 package build for i386/x86_64 done on 2.11, which will work for 2.12 or master.  

Having a nifty new software version with potential bugs is not unique to our software project.  Let's do what other projects do: say "Here's the new version.  It's in beta.  It has a lot of new features, but may have new bugs.  Please test".  That way we're not releasing with a known nasty bug, but we're not shutting off access to an already wildly improved next release.

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Samuel J. Greear <sjg@evilcode.net> wrote:

If we are voting, I like E. But Justin is the release engineer this
cycle and I think he should decide. That said, I am sure he values all
of this input.

Sam