Changes

No change in size , 12:46, 8 April 2009

m

Line 17: Line 17:

I think we should just be flexible in this respect:

−

* In the normal case maintainers of activities included in the Sugar

+

* In the normal case maintainers of activities included in the Sugar release process should be willing to follow the schedule, i.e. provide

−

release process should be willing to follow the schedule, i.e. provide

+

development and stable releases more or less in sync with the Sugar process.

−

development and stable releases more or less in sync with the Sugar

+

* If there is a need to skip a development cycle (for example because the developers are working on large features or refactoring of the

−

process.

−

* If there is a need to skip a development cycle (for example because

−

the developers are working on large features or refactoring of the

code) it's fine to do so.

−

* Activities are encouraged to release stable updates outside the

+

* Activities are encouraged to release stable updates outside the Sugar dev cycle when there is need to do so.

−

Sugar dev cycle when there is need to do so.

:> In some cases, there is more than one choice for a core activity:

2,751

edits

Talk:Development Team/Release/0.82 (view source)