On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Joe Julian <joe at julianfamily.org> wrote: > As one of the guys supporting this software, I agree that I would like > bugfix releases to happen more. Critical and security bugs should trigger > an immediate test release. Other bug fixes should go out on a reasonable > schedule (monthly?). The relatively new CI testing should make this a lot > more feasible. > Joe, we will certainly be increasing the frequency of releases to push out bug fixes sooner. Though this has been a consistent theme in everybody's comments, your feedback in particular weighs in heavily because of your level of involvement in guiding our users :-) Avati > > If there weren't hundreds of bugs to examine between releases, I would > happily participate in the evaluation process. > > > On 07/26/2013 05:16 PM, Bryan Whitehead wrote: > >> I would really like to see releases happen regularly and more >> aggressively. So maybe this plan needs a community QA guy or the >> release manager needs to take up that responsibility to say "this code >> is good for including in the next version". (Maybe this falls under >> process and evaluation?) >> >> For example, I think the ext4 patches had long been available but they >> just took forever to get pushed out into an official release. >> >> I'm in favor of closing some bugs and risking introducing new bugs for >> the sake of releases happening often. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Anand Avati <anand.avati at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hello everyone, >>> >>> We are in the process of formalizing the governance model of the >>> GlusterFS >>> project. Historically, the governance of the project has been loosely >>> structured. This is an invitation to all of you to participate in this >>> discussion and provide your feedback and suggestions on how we should >>> evolve >>> a formal model. Feedback from this thread will be considered to the >>> extent >>> possible in formulating the draft (which will be sent out for review as >>> well). >>> >>> Here are some specific topics to seed the discussion: >>> >>> - Core team formation >>> - what are the qualifications for membership (e.g contributions of >>> code, >>> doc, packaging, support on irc/lists, how to quantify?) >>> - what are the responsibilities of the group (e.g direction of the >>> project, project roadmap, infrastructure, membership) >>> >>> - Roadmap >>> - process of proposing features >>> - process of selection of features for release >>> >>> - Release management >>> - timelines and frequency >>> - release themes >>> - life cycle and support for releases >>> - project management and tracking >>> >>> - Project maintainers >>> - qualification for membership >>> - process and evaluation >>> >>> There are a lot more topics which need to be discussed, I just named >>> some to >>> get started. I am sure our community has members who belong and >>> participate >>> (or at least are familiar with) other open source project communities. >>> Your >>> feedback will be valuable. >>> >>> Looking forward to hearing from you! >>> >>> Avati >>> >>> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20130730/6e2ad32a/attachment-0001.html>
