Blockers in Bugfix-Releases (Re: [Release Planning 3.6] Samba 3.6.6 on May 31 (was May 24)?)

Björn JACKE bj at SerNet.DE
Mon Jun 18 07:21:39 MDT 2012

On 2012-06-18 at 12:26 +0200 Stefan (metze) Metzmacher sent off:
> > I am a big fan of schedule-based releases. Every x weeks we
> > ship a new minor release. Period. No exceptions. What is
> > ready at week x-1 goes in, what is not ready does not. Even
> > if we ship with known bugs, this is better than not shipping
> > at all for months. This completely removes the burden to
> > make a bug a blocker or not. If we ship with known problems
> > it is not *that* bad because we know we will ship in a
> > timely fashion later. If a known problem is considered
> > severe and is fixed significantly before the next scheduled
> > release, we could consider doing a release in between.
> > 
> > Security releases are different. I would say that we can
> > ship a release with a known security problem as long as it
> > is not public yet. When we go public, it is the #1 reason to
> > do an immediate intermediate release.
> > 
> > Just my 2ct,
> I fully agree on that:-)
> The important thing is that the next release is better than the current one,
> we don't need to wait until the next release is perfect.

fully +1

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list