On 4/10/13 6:27 PM, Daniel Russel wrote:
Given comments so far, it seems to me like a good idea to try. And now seems as good a time as any. So shall we have our first mini-release by next week?
Given your proposed timeframe (4-6 months between mini releases) and my proposed timeframe for "normal" releases (6 months) there seems little point in making a distinction - the "mini" releases should just be releases. As long as everything compiles, the examples actually work, and there aren't any serious test failures (this last is open to interpretation, of course!), we may as well make a full release. (Then we can also replace the outdated 1.0 release on the website.) The only blocker for a 2.0 release (to my knowledge) is MultiFit, and I should have that documented and working well enough by the end of next week. So Barak's suggestion seems reasonable to me.
Of course, there's no reason not to also have a stable branch updated at the same time as a numbered release.
Ben
--
http://salilab.org/~ben/
"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle