From xemacs-m  Sun Jan  5 17:37:28 1997
Received: from axis.daedalusww.com (axis.daedalusww.com [206.4.88.3])
          by xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id RAA13401 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 17:37:27 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from pez@localhost) by axis.daedalusww.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) id SAA17268; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 18:38:06 -0500
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 18:38:06 -0500
Message-Id: <199701052338.SAA17268@axis.daedalusww.com>
From: Peter Pezaris <pez@dwwc.com>
To: David Moore <dmoore@UCSD.EDU>
Cc: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: release plan (was Re: XEmacs 20.0-b34 is released)
In-Reply-To: <rvbub3viex.fsf_-_@sdnp5.ucsd.edu>
References: <m2k9ps3hae.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
	<199701050420.XAA07275@spacely.icd.teradyne.com>
	<199701051748.KAA02986@branagh.lanl.gov>
	<m2iv5bvkpf.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
	<rvbub3viex.fsf_-_@sdnp5.ucsd.edu>
Reply-To: pez@dwwc.com


    David> 	If you released 19.15 next week say, and
    David> 20.0 in early Feb. It seems that a 19.16 could
    David> be done in mid-feb if needed, but hopefully it
    David> won't be needed? :)

Maybe I'm missing something big... could someone please
explain to me why we would ever need a 19.16? How long do
we plan to support 19.x versions?

I would say to get 19.15 out the door, and make sure you
make it clear that 20.0 is coming *soon* (and mean it).
Then for any bugs reported, just fix them in 20.0.
Release 20.0 as soon as it's ready (incliding addressing
any bugs reported against 19.15).

I guess a 19.16 just doesn't make much sense to me.

MHO,
Pez

