Le 02/11/2010 23:05, Chris Cormack a écrit :
I think we (all) failed because Koha 3.2 was 9 months late. Well, in fact, I think the mistake was not to branch 3.4 immediatly on feature freeze. That would have been much less pain for us (that are customer-planning driven) (suggestion below).
What would have caused much much much less pain for you, was to develop your features in small branches, rather than one monolithic branch which makes rebasing much harder than it needs to be.
This is a lesson that cannot be overstated, topic/bug/feature branches make everyones lives much easier. And they mean that if one feature is rejected ... then the whole stack doesn't need to be.
agreed: we made a mistake here. (and don't plan to do it again !)
I don't think branching sooner or an earlier release would have helped anywhere near as much as developing in smaller branches, not one huge one.
Partially agreeing, I'd like to discuss of this topic on the next IRC meeting, i'm not fully sure I see clearly the best path (branching too early means that bugfix patches would have to be done on both branches) -- Paul POULAIN http://www.biblibre.com Expert en Logiciels Libres pour l'info-doc Tel : (33) 4 91 81 35 08