Re: Future release schedules

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> IOW, I think we can only switch to this model if we drastically reduce the
> time interval between major releases, to something like a year or less, or
> if we start maintaining 3 branches, not 2. Both alternatives require radical
> changes in the process and the procedures, to say nothing about the
> manpower.

I'd like to cut new major releases once a year, even if they only introduce a
few new features. That is, there should always be two active branches: the
current release branch, and 'master' leading up to the next release branch.

There could also be a third branch, the previous release (i.e., emacs-24 right
now), if we really want to nail stability for people still on that version,
but I expect involvement on such a branch to remain low.

I'm not sure this requires a radical change in process and procedure. We keep
doing what we're doing today, we just release with shorter NEWS entries.

John