3 ms·

>Features that haven't been fully baked would be pushed in to the current release because people wouldn't want to wait another 6 months to see their work come t

>Features that haven't been fully baked would be pushed in to the current release because people wouldn't want to wait another 6 months to see their work come to fruition. Only if Rust has an awful leadership team organizing those releases. Strong leadership and careful release planning nips this right in the bud. "Your feature was only 'finished' a week ago? No way in hell is it making the release. See you in six months." The other view is that shipping less frequently encourages features to be shipped fully baked and matured, with plenty of time for careful thought and attention given to their design and implementation.

steveklabnik 6y ago
The point is, you build a process that encourages the outcome you want. A six-week release cycle makes it easier to do the right thing. Even with the six week cycle, we do this, with const generics being the latest example. But it's much, much easier to say "hey it's just six more weeks" than "hey it's just three more years," not just on the folks making the decision, but on the folks doing the work, and on the folks excited to use the feature. > shipping less frequently encourages features to be shipped fully baked and matured, Right, but this is just a view. A significant part of the industry believes that shipping less frequently discourages this. We've found that shipping more frequently allows us to take our time and fully bake and mature features in Rust.