Patrick wrote: > The current development/release system seems revolutionary rather then > evolutionary. Instead of the revolutionary dev model with significant > code changes and distant releases I would like the Asterisk dev model to > move to a more evolutionary model with more incremental and less > invasive code changes per (sub-)release and where releases are made way > more often than today. Basically I would like the Asterisk dev model to > mimic the Linux kernel dev model with 2 month release intervals and > bi-weekly (or more often) sub-releases so folks can test. Because of the > much shorter cycle of 2 months and much shorter freeze, new features > that missed the commit window would be available in the code repo the > day after a release when the commit window is open again. > > Rereading your post it seems that your thoughts under item #2 are very > similar so in that case +1 and thanks for the open discussion :)
Yes, the current Linux kernel development model is a big part of my inspiration for this. However, I don't expect nearly as high of a percentage of users running our development tree 1.5, as there are that use the 2.6 kernel. -- Russell Bryant Software Engineer Digium, Inc. _______________________________________________ Sign up now for AstriCon 2007! September 25-28th. http://www.astricon.net/ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
