Proposed Release Plan changes
axel.grude at googlemail.com
Fri Aug 10 23:06:12 UTC 2012
> On 8/10/2012 8:57 AM, Mark Banner wrote:
>> On 09/08/2012 06:18, Ludovic Hirlimann wrote:
>>>> * All releases will be based on Gecko ESR releases
>>>> * To provide a more stable core for releases, so that we're not affected so
>>>> much by Gecko changes
>>>> * The ESR model will remain the same, separate from the mainstream channel
>>> Hum why that besides the channel change they'd be identical, I don't see the need
>>> to keep two channels with the same product. What's the point in keeping ESR and
>>> release based on the same ESR code ?
>> Keeping them separate gives the opportunity for intermediate releases if we have a
>> significant amount of features ready. If we didn't have separate channels, then we
>> wouldn't be able to do those intermediate releases because we'd be breaking the ESR
>> promise. As we don't yet know the amount of contributions that we'll get going
>> forward I feel it would be better to keep the opportunity available rather than
>> take it away. We can always review it in a year or two.
> Would it be possible to guesstimate what would happen in an "average" release cycle
> by looking at the changes from TB 10-now?
So far this has been fairly confusing to me; for the "normal" release channel (if you
didn't suggest scrapping it altogether) a house-number like "updates not less than 8
weeks but never more than 4 months" would be helpful.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tb-planning