Skipping a relase would send a dubious message to our users, it's much better to release it in a simpler form, e.g. with not so many new things
I agree with that and there are some facts that we should consider before moving forward. These facts are the numbers and also some metrics concerning the each release. From my point of view (and research) the number of downloads show as a fact but there other numbers-metrics missing and those are : 1) Number of bug (opened/closed) -- Bug ratio 2) Number of installations/downloads -- Already known 3) Number of Features -- We should measure the number of Feature in each release (release notes could be our friend ;)) These number can be easily "correlated" . For instance we can correlate the number of installations with the number of features and the bug ratio. If in 12.1 we had 100k downloads , 300 features and Bug ratio = 0.60 and in the next release the name of features increases 10 % , the number of downloads decreases 5 % but the bug ratio raises up (e.g 0.70) that should mean that people did not install/upgrade to 12.3 due to the fact that more bugs are opened than closed. More calculations and metrics can be gathered (you can have a look on Eclipse example [1]) but the point is how willing are to use these number in order to decide a possible change in the release cycle of openSUSE...
The last release in July (12.2) was not our strongest one - you have trouble
This fact can be verified from this paper as well [2]. For people who
are willing to read more, they could have a look on a very
interesting PhD dissertation about release cycle models in FOSS
projects [3] (Chapter 3).
Geekings,
Ilias R.
[1] https://polarsys.org/wiki/index.php/EclipseMetrics
[2] http://tux.gseis.ucla.edu/WSL2013_papers/Robles_sentiment_analysis_of_openSU...
[3] http://www.cyrius.com/publications/michlmayr-phd.pdf
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Richard Brown
On 18 December 2013 09:55, Jos Poortvliet
wrote: On Wednesday 18 December 2013 07:09:13 Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am 17.12.2013 23:46, schrieb Simon:
I guess looking at it from the outside could you change the releasen cycle for the next 2 releases to yearly, that would in theory give the team 8 month's (2 lots of 4) to focus on non release work before starting the release process. From a user perspective waiting a year instead of 8 months seems better then skipping a release. If we skip a release we also miss out on all the publicity generated by a release and a release half way through would give a chance to test some of the stuff that had already been done. If it worked for the next 2 releases maybe it cold be kept long term so the tea can keep improving openSUSE.
This is something I considered proposing too, so I support it. The last release in July (12.2) was not our strongest one - you have trouble starting into the new year, then there is the openSUSE conference and suddenly you find yourself in July with a not so great release that no one actually cares for because the journalists are already in summer vacation mode.
So with the additional risks involved with others taking over the tasks the openSUSE team did for the last releases, it's not too unlikely the same slip might happen again - so why not plan with it and always release in October?
Sounds very good to me, too - a October (or November) release is better from a whole bunch of reasons ;-)
So, +1
I've lost count of the times I've suggested a yearly cycle for releases, and Oct/Nov releases always seem to go smoother for us, so +1 for me for 13.2 coming out in October with an expectation that 13.3 would come out October 2015 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
-- Ilias R. (Zoumpis) -- About Me-- http://zoumpis.wordpress.com https://github.com/athanrous -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org