Puppet users - May 2007 - RFC: Multiple small releases, or one big roll-up?

Hi all,

In looking at the current bug list for elmo[1], it''s pretty clear  
that this is a lot of work, and some of it is kind of segmented into  
related chunks.  Additionally, a good bit of it has an impact on  
backward compatibility, although in nearly all cases I expect to be  
able to remain entirely or almost entirely backwards compatible.

Given that, would people prefer that I put out a few related releases  
in relatively quick succession, so they could do a gradual migration,  
or would they prefer one big roll-up release with lots of changes in it?

I prefer the roll-up release, but only if people are willing to help  
test.  I almost never get bug reports on prerelease code, which means  
I usually have to release something to get people to test it.  I  
suppose I could do the big roll-up, release it as 0.23.0 neé 1.0rc1.

Comments?

1 - https://reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/query? 
status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&milestone=elmo&order=priority

  --
  What''s the good of having mastery over cosmic balance and knowing the
  secrets of fate if you can''t blow something up?
                  -- Terry Pratchett, "Reaper Man"
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
  Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 09 May 2007, Luke Kanies wrote:
> In looking at the current bug list for elmo[1], it''s pretty clear
> that this is a lot of work, and some of it is kind of segmented into
> related chunks.  Additionally, a good bit of it has an impact on
> backward compatibility, although in nearly all cases I expect to be
> able to remain entirely or almost entirely backwards compatible.
>
> Given that, would people prefer that I put out a few related releases
> in relatively quick succession, so they could do a gradual migration,
> or would they prefer one big roll-up release with lots of changes in it?
>
> I prefer the roll-up release, but only if people are willing to help
> test.  I almost never get bug reports on prerelease code, which means
> I usually have to release something to get people to test it.  I
> suppose I could do the big roll-up, release it as 0.23.0 neé 1.0rc1.
>
> Comments?
seeing that 0.22 took four not-so-small releases until all nits were picked, I 
would presume that 0.23 will also need quite a shake in period. Giving the 
child a proper name would help testing. 0.23.0 is a release after all, not 
some funky candidate-something which will have everything fixed soon anyways. 


Regards, David
- -- 
- - hallo... wie gehts heute?
- - *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch*
- - gott sei dank kommunizieren wir über ein septisches medium ;)
 -- Matthias Leeb, Uni f. angewandte Kunst, 2005-02-15
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGQjvf/Pp1N6Uzh0URAkw4AJ4jOSNnOLmZ+FuL+SxRvOvi7mZvhQCfSYsn
BmDIDto9yPCng6eiFt+imY8=WT8G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 03:53:59PM -0500, Luke Kanies
wrote:
> Given that, would people prefer that I put out a few related releases  
> in relatively quick succession, so they could do a gradual migration,  
> or would they prefer one big roll-up release with lots of changes in it?
I''m a devoted fan of "release early, release often". 
Although one big "here
it is, people" release makes it easier to transition, it also hinders
transition and hence early detection of new "misfeatures".  Further,
making
people wait months for some new feature they''re really hanging out for
is
annoying.

- Matt

-- 
Part[s] of .us are the global benchmark for pumpkin being a verb.
		-- Anthony de Boer

On May 9, 2007, at 4:23 PM, David Schmitt wrote:
>
> seeing that 0.22 took four not-so-small releases until all nits  
> were picked, I
> would presume that 0.23 will also need quite a shake in period.  
> Giving the
> child a proper name would help testing. 0.23.0 is a release after  
> all, not
> some funky candidate-something which will have everything fixed  
> soon anyways.
That''s not *really* true -- 0.22.2 should have been 0.23.0, I just  
wasn''t thinking.

But your point is made, and Matt clearly agrees -- I''ll try to add  
some pre-elmo milestones, and I''ll be strict about releasing when a  
milestone is met.  I still might do simple bugfix releases unrelated  
to milestones, but I''ll make sure I keep my major development work  
along the path of milestones, so people can see what''s coming and  
what''s changed.  Sound good?

Recommendations for the next milestone (which will be 0.23.0)?

  --
  Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important
  stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it.
                  --Linus Torvalds on linux-kernel
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
  Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com