I'm sorry for that!
Is there a bunch of commits for reference, so that next time some work can be saved?
At the FWT we're discussing faster minor releases following the semantic versioning scheme. I expect more minor releases coming this year.
I don't mind that, the more the better, the problem that this thread was a post-announcement rather than a pre-announcement.
And yes of course for 5.2 it will be easier/faster but I (others from the testing team) may be on holidays, etc etc
So some planning and guidelines would be best, rather than marching forward not matter what and fixing things afterwards.
And as @tisto was pointing, usually Eric was doing it with enough time to put things going on. If we had the time to discuss that within the release team, at least I could have raised the concern of having the CI setup ready to go.
Bottom line: we need to document and make sure that anybody involved in this process has a heads-up and can be involved in the timing.
I understand that, but my other concern is try to avoid the mistakes of previous releases when we tried to do too much and that complicated the whole release and adoption processes. I would prefer to have many small releases adding a few well-discussed features and fixing as many bugs as we can.
may we consider that list of features the one from the FWT minutes listed before?
and I just want to be clear before someone came here to tell me the obvious, that I'm neither the release manager nor a member of the FWT: the whole process is way too important to leave its decisions in the hands of a few core developers, no matter how good they are; everybody interested should be able to express opinions on the topic.
we need an updated roadmap.
1 Like
I've been swamped this week and haven't been able to weigh in. The Framework Team did decide to move on to 5.1 during our last meeting, but I wasn't under the impression that it was something that was going to happen right now, otherwise I would have set it up myself.