[tei-council] another agenda item

[Syd Bauman]

> Did we have this policy? If not, I assume we should introduce it:-)

I didn't think so, and as I said, I don't think it's necessarily the
right way to proceed. 


> > I'd propose that in this pre-release protion of P5's lifecycle,
> > pretty much any significant change (including bug fixes) that
> > results in a self-consistent, self- validating, working version
> > of the Guidelines should trigger a new release on Sourceforge.
> 
> Then you might end up with frequent new snapshots, which might be
> of mixed quality (cf the eXist development model). I assume that
> people interested that much in the day-to-day development could as
> easily follow the CVS.

What is the eXist development model?

In any case, the logic behind my suggestion was that although the
content of the snapshot releases might be mixed in nature, we'd only
make snaphots of "working" versions of the Guidelines, specifically
to avoid poor-quality snapshots. The idea being that CVS followers
take their chances, but snapshot downloaders should get the newest we
can provide that we know is at least rudimentarily OK.

Another policy to add on top would be to say that we don't make a new
snapshot unless not only is it a self-validating, self-consistent,
consistent version, but it is in some way better than the previous
snapshot. 


> Apart from that, I think it would make sense to delegate the
> timings of the other releases to Sebastian (or whoever is
> involved), they do not seem to fall directly into the area of the
> work the council is supervising.

While it may be Sebastian who does the actual work, I believe that
Council should set the basic principles or Guidelines, and the
editors should decide when snapshots are in order according to them.