prep for 1.0.1

[Mark Atwood]

I am inclined towards quarterly release schedule as well, modified with
doing a release when we discover an important enough issue, and we will
delay a release if we discover an important enough issue.

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 1:41 PM Hal Murray via devel <devel at ntpsec.org>
wrote:

>
> rlaager at wiktel.com said:
> > If you're going to move to time-based, you might consider quarterly
> > releases?
>
> I'd be happy with quarterly releases.
>
> The next question is how seriously do we take the release date?  I think
> there are two approaches.  The first is to try hard to release as
> scheduled.
> That means we have to be conservative and leave plenty of time for testing
> and the associated cleanups.  The other approach is to leave less time for
> testing but slip the release if/when we find interesting problems.
>
>
> > Longer release cycles allow developers and users of git to test some
> changes
> > longer, but that's only helpful if you have a freeze.
>
> I'm assuming there will be a freeze.  Or at least a cooling off period
> where
> the changes are small and reviewed carefully, maybe smaller and more
> carefully reviewed and tested as we get closer to the release.
>
> -----------
>
> There might be a need for more time between releases if we ever make a big
> change.  I don't have any good examples right now.
>
>
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions.  I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at ntpsec.org
> http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
-- 

Mark Atwood
http://about.me/markatwood
+1-206-604-2198
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ntpsec.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20180226/21f7f6da/attachment.html>