4 ms·
Unfortunately, it seems like short release cycles can also lead to buggier released; after all, who cares, it'll all be fixed in eight weeks or whatever, right?
by mook 11y ago
Unfortunately, it seems like short release cycles can also lead to buggier released; after all, who cares, it'll all be fixed in eight weeks or whatever, right? It's not like people will be using the broken thing for a year.
Of course, the next release will then have a _different_ minor bug. Then the pattern repeats.
- organsnyder 11y agoI don't think that long release cycles are the solution for this, though—major x.0 releases are well-known for often being buggy themselves, after all. I think that buggy releases speak more to problems with general project management and priorities than to the release schedule used.
- ozten 11y agoMissing a train isn't a big deal if it's every 6 or 8 weeks, so you can delay or stay feature flagged off until the next train leaves the station.
- sitharus 11y agoThey can, but in my experience they don't. If you release every two weeks and something isn't fully signed off at the end you don't release it - it's only two weeks until the next one. If you release every three months you cram in everything you can because it'll be at least three months until the next release. Of course it's only true if you treat releases as an opportunity, not a constraint. If you don't promise dates but keep the opportunities frequent you get more done.
- davidgerard 11y agoThis is not how it works out in practice, at all. In practice, the slow release cycle works out worse.