[BuildStream] Proposal: naming for BuildStream release

[Agustín Benito Bethencourt <agustin benito codethink co uk>]

Hi,

the current proposal to define names for what we release are:

o Call "stable releases"      -> "releases"

o Call "development releases" -> "development snapshots"

o Call "stable branches"      -> "release branches"

## Snapshot

Let me start by saying that for many out there, a released snapshot is 
installable. If we use "snapshot", for something that is not installable, 
no matter how accurate this term could be, we would be fighting against 
dragons. I would use a term that introduces little controversy.

Many would expect that a released snapshot of a tool includes an installer. 
I believe this will not be always the case for us.

## Releases

I would keep the word release intact. It is a software that you consider it 
has finished the delivery phase and get into the deployment stage. I 
understand this meaning is slightly different in a Cont. Deployment context 
than it is in embedded, for instance. But is a clear one once you have 
defined your own delivery vs deployment model.

I would not use it in substitution of stable.

## Stable

I would simple substitute the word stable for something more accurate that 
provide a sense that moves slow and is maintained (in the Open Source 
sense, which is already accepted in some industries).

As alternative...

Why do we branch before releasing?

There are many reasons for doing this but (not all good ones, by the way), 
but the main one is to be able to stabilize the product before releasing it 
without stopping the flow in master. This is popular strategy in projects 
that:
* Have a significant number of developers so synchronizing them all in a 
specific release has more downsides than benefits.
* The stabilization and validation requirements are so strong or take so 
much effort that the organization cannot afford to make development wait 
for delivery to stabilize and validate.
* The product is inmature so master is not stable enough to stabilize it 
while accepting new code. This seems to be our case.

So if the root cause is stabilization, that might provide us a hint to find 
the right name instead of "stable".

Sorry for not providing options at this point. I am on it. I have to 
confess that I see nothing but problems in the proposal.

Can we give it a little more thought? The risk of wasting part of our 
coming effort on the release in order to target new users increases if the 
terminology generates controversy.

Best Regards

-- 
Agustín Benito Bethencourt
Principal Consultant
Codethink Ltd
We respect your privacy.   See https://www.codethink.co.uk/privacy.html