On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>>> I'd extend 2 to include major version releases ...
>>>
>>> I wouldn't. Keep in mind that this includes a lot of commercial software.
>>> EMS Hitech, for example, seems to have a "major version release" every week.
>
>> Use discretion?
>
> I think Josh is trying to minimize the amount of discretion needed,
> so that whoever makes these calls can't be accused of favoritism.
>
> Personally I think it's reasonable to have some guidelines, not
> hard rules. In this case maybe we could suggest a time constraint:
> "major release" announcements are ok if they're at least a year apart.
> (Or six months, or whatever we feel is appropriate.)
I think EMS Hitech is an extreme case ... but, if I recall right, weren't
they doing an announce per minor release? ie. 1.1.1 v 1.1.2?
But, I do agree about the time constraints ... maybe throw in a 'past
track record' also? for instance, we release 7.5.0, and it will generally
be ~1 month before 7.5.1 comes out, but it may be 3 before 7.5.2 does ...
in our case, we might have a short time between minors right after a major
release, but we also don't send out a minor release just cause we happen
to have backpatched a single feature ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
