Re: Move to a cadence release model?

[Óscar Fuentes]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

[snip]

> And maybe there are other arrangements that might enable cadence.

The key to a successful cadence release model is QA. It works very well
for projects such as Clang/LLVM (possibly could do for GCC as well)
because their extensive test suite. Also, if you have many resources for
QA and bug-fixing, implying that most relevant problems will be
discovered and fixed on a short timeframe, cadence is good too.

As Emacs has no strong test suite (automatic testing of UI is hard, so
no cure for this on sight) neither has many resources for steady manual
testing and bug-fixing, I'm afraid that switching to the cadence model
would deteriorate the quality of releases.

A pity, because otherwise it is a great model, for the reasons given by
the OP.

[snip]