I understand. But wouldn't that depend on the quality of the releases?

On Wednesday, 3 November 2021 at 17:18:19 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:

I guess so. At the times it didn't felt right and people, guess what, would complain on the forums! :)

I don't have time to write a proper post, but I have a suggestion.

Could we increase the time between releases?

Today we have in practice 15 days between minor versions. That might be ok, but "major" releases are too frequent.

The logic behind that is it would hopefully put more focus on testing and reliability etc. If we have to live with a release for a longer time period, the theory is everyone will be more cautious when making a change.

Theory vs practice applies ofc, but I think it could be positive. As for what amount of time makes most sense, I'm not sure yet.

Thoughts?

On Wednesday, 3 November 2021 at 09:13:59 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:

If we are to do this, I think a better model would be to have every two or three minor releases (With minor releases I mean what you do with major releases. The correct term for what you call minor releases are patch releases.) be "supported" releases where the latest stable branch and patch releases are based on. Minor releases would be just as frequent as now, just that the non-supported minor releases would not get patches.