From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Henningsson Subject: ALSA release cycle Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 13:38:12 +0200 Message-ID: <5049DCA4.6000607@canonical.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from youngberry.canonical.com (youngberry.canonical.com [91.189.89.112]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 980352616C8 for ; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 13:38:13 +0200 (CEST) List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Hi, At Plumber's we discussed the ALSA release cycle. Our releases recently have been irregular, and the reasoning behind why a release was done at that time, has not been very obvious. IIRC, we kind of leaned towards releasing every six months. I don't remember if there was any consensus about whether to try to align this cycle to something else (e g Gnome, KDE, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc), or not. We also said that we should discuss this on the mailinglist as the ALSA release manager (Jaroslav Kysela) was not present during Plumber's. So this effectively is a mail to kick off that discussion. Any opinions? Also, as a side note (or perhaps proof of the problem!), it seems ALSA 1.0.26 was just released without even a notification on this mailinglist...? -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic