Re: Release process & rolling new releases

[Richard Braun]

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 05:09:30PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> For me, the question rather is, what constitutes the releases that we
> publish?  Some new, exciting features (including considerable bug fixing,
> code re-writes, re-factoring, and so on), on the one hand, or regular
> time-based releases on the other (for example, annually).  The former has
> the process that the new features are added, and then there is a
> stabilization period where only bug fixes go in, then the release is
> made, and the latter is basically just a snapshot of the repository at a
> more or less "random" date.  Due to lack of manpower to maintain a
> "proper" release process, I see us more on the side of doing snapshots,
> which we can do any time we like.  Now is a good time, you say?  (I'm not
> disagreeing -- the previous release having been one year ago.)
> 
> Given this, and with our last Hurd release having been 0.5, what would
> the next version be?  0.5.1?  0.6?  Or, make it obvious that it is just a
> snapshot, and thus call that GNU Hurd 20140923 or similar?

I suggest time-based releases, using a 0.x scheme (until the major
number can be bumped to 1), so a 0.6 release. These would be snapshots
of the repositories, and 0.x.y releases would include bug fixes,
probably based on demand, for highly annoying bugs. As mentioned, one
release every 6-to-12 months should be enough. The goal here is merely
to provide specific points in time that others can base their work on
(the Nix-based distribution comes to mind).

-- 
Richard Braun