Re: New release policy for OpenLDAP

[Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com>]

On 1/28/20 6:30 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Tuesday, January 28, 2020 10:08 AM +0100 Michael Ströder
> <michael@stroeder.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 1/27/20 11:17 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
>>> --On Monday, January 27, 2020 10:45 PM +0100 Michael Ströder
>>> <michael@stroeder.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/27/20 10:19 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
>>>>> To me, frequent releases
>>>>> generally indicate an immature, unstable, and buggy product. ;)
>>>>
>>>> Are you sarcastic here?
>>>
>>> No, not at all.  [..] If we release every 2 weeks, but slapd core
>>> dumps 90% of the time, is that really better?  Sure, the project
>>> looks more "active", but I wouldn't see that as a benefit/gain.
>> ITS#9124 is known since almost two months now and there's no upstream
>> release with a fix. (And remember that I've tested RE24 branch revealing
>> that the first fix was seg faulting.)
> 
> You're switching topics.

Nope. I'm very much on-topic.

ITS#9124 is a good example that the "stable" status of the release
branch is just an assumption. It makes clear that a quicker process for
more urgent releases is needed.

I'm not blaming anybody that there are bugs. We are all humans and we
make faults. Period. But stating that there are bugs in "stable"
releases is what really concerns me.

Today releasing is already way too slow. And I'm concerned that a
release policy with additional constraints, as suggested with
odd-/even-numbered releases, will make it even harder to get important
fixes out of the door.

Ciao, Michael.