What _is_ up with v2.110?

[Adam Wilson]

On Monday, 3 March 2025 at 09:22:25 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote:
> I don't want to push on Ian but at what point does this start 
> to become an existential issue? Like at what point do you say 
> "okay we're not getting a release page this time but we're 
> tagging it anyway?" It's been the better part of a *year.* The 
> project already doesn't have too many contributors, and at some 
> point the question will be raised "well, we've been writing 
> bugfixes, so are we going to see them in a release soon?"

Honestly, I barely noticed. 109 has been a solid release and I 
used it until the last BeerConf when I needed the nightlies to 
get an ImportC fix I had requested the day before.

Which, in my opinion, is exactly what you should be doing if you 
need a bug-fix. If you need a bug-fix that quickly than even the 
monthly cadence is too long to wait, so you would be best served 
by using a nightly. This also shortens the loop on any further 
fixes you might need and you'll catch regressions long before 
they make it into the next release, and then you have to wait for 
the release after that to get them fixed, so you could easily end 
up burning two months waiting.

If you need the bleeding edge, you need the nightlies, a 
fast-rolling release cadence is a poor substitute.

> The project isn't viable if it can't release.

Nobody says this about other languages despite them being on much 
longer release timelines. C++ is three years. Rust editions are 
three years. C# is yearly. Java is twice yearly.

In the grand scheme of things a yearly release cadence is 
actually pretty quick.

Now that I think about it, we follow the SemVer formatting, but 
we don't actually follow SemVer. That might be something worth 
looking into.