On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 8:21 AM Justin Forbes <jmforbes@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Long cycles have been done before, and will be done again, it has been > 4 or 5 years since the last one. I think skipping to a yearly cadence > for every release isn't such a great idea. There are benefits to the > cadence we have, but I do think perhaps a plan to regularly do this > might be a good thing. Agreed. Doing a long cycle is a tradeoff. In general, the six month cycle works for what we're trying to do. But having the occasional long cycle gives us some space to work on bigger projects or things that can't be done while we're also trying to get a release out the door. With unlimited funding and people, we wouldn't have to make this tradeoff, but we do have limits. I'm sympathetic to the argument that we should do it as needed, but my preference is to schedule it. This allows our community to plan ahead, both for the work to be done during the long cycle and also for things that should get done before and after. Predictability is helpful. If we do say, for example, every 8th release will be a long cycle there's nothing that would prevent us from doing an unscheduled long cycle if we have to. But it would have to be a very compelling reason knowing that we'd have another long release coming up. -- Ben Cotton Fedora Program Manager TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
