[Bf-committers] Blender Release Cycle
doug at flipdesign.co.nz
Fri Aug 19 00:45:43 CEST 2011
> Another example of a release failure is KDE 4. They released and
> called it stable and thus it was being using in distros. Problem was
> that it was far from finished and very buggy. This lead to the massive
> flood of users going to other desktops. To this day KDEs reputation is
> not as good as it was. There needs to be a clear communications
> between devs and users about what is alpha, beta and final releases.
> Stable releases are expected to be full featured, stable and usable
> products, dev releases are not.
Just to chime in here with an idea that is not related to coding.
Is it worth having the 3 monthly/12weekly release cycle, but of these,
having a Documentation release once a year, where one of the releases
for a year is given the status of the supported, stable and more
thoroughly tested release that is designed to have written documentation
I'd suggest a documentation release should be timed to proceed the
school year by about 3 months, which would give educators a chance to
update their documentation on a set schedule. It would give some
consistency to materials from around the world, and would give authors
and educators a set schedule to work around.
Does that address the issues of rapid feature development, while
satisfying the needs of those who value stability and consistency over
shiny new things?
More information about the Bf-committers