tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13831777.post-31314372421399091512008-01-05T20:08:00.000-05:002008-01-05T20:08:00.000-05:00Hi Melbournian,<BR/><BR/>While the main point of presenting the practice of frequent releases is to provide another tool for the toolbox (though I don't mean to say that it should be used infrequently :-) ), and as such one must use discretion in when and how to apply it, you raise a good point.<BR/><BR/>In a major release, there will be much more new functionality than if you are doing frequent releases. Perhaps by as much as 12 to 1. That functionality was probably produced under pressure and unevenly tested compared to the frequent releases.<BR/><BR/>With frequent releases, there will be much less new functionality and it will have received much more consistent testing (or else you are not really ready for frequent releases).<BR/><BR/>Since it is new functionality, you can be careful to mark it as such and users who want that release for some other reason can avoid the new functionality altogether.<BR/><BR/>In any case, I think our thinking on "dual trains" and "stable branch" is fairly close and I certainly agree that caution is advised when going further.Damon Poolehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16561311551267979837noreply@blogger.com