Next focus: PROCESS

[Jesse Phillips]

On Wednesday, 19 December 2012 at 06:31:04 UTC, Rob T wrote:
> Perhaps there is resistance to changing from the current 
> "snapshot" process which tends to produce meaningless 
> buggy/breaking releases, to one that is a "feature" based 
> release.

I don not see a greater correlation between snapshot releases and 
buggy/breaking any more than a feature based release being 
buggy/breaking.

To facilitate feature releases a plan for what/how many features 
will make a release. I'm not against having these, only against 
requiring it for a release.

Having it based on "important" or "enough" changes is subjective 
and the small things can be very important to someone. And even 
with just bugs, how many make for a good release/revision (we 
have way to many names that all seem to mean something different 
to everyone)?

I will agree though, if there isn't anything worth releasing, 
don't release it. But my threshold for 'worth' is much lower than 
yours.

I'd also say it has little to do with new "features" as it is 
about completing features and disruptive bugs. I'd think the 
supported/stable/lts/somethingsomething would be open to Phobos 
additions, but I'm not too concerned as things can be changed.