My Agile is extremely outdated, but I used to be very well versed in the
ways of XP, the granddaddy of Agile. So if anything I say is outdated
Agile thinking, let me know.
Our build should be ready for release at any time. I think that's still
an Agile principle?
By definition, we should release at the end of each sprint. Otherwise,
you are really doing a 6 week sprint instead of 3.
The reason we release is to get feedback. So a sprint should only
contain something that is useful and complete. And by complete, I mean
it does something useful (circular logic, I know). If it's not ready to
do something useful, you don't merge it. Just save it for the next sprint.
But if you do a "pretend" sprint and then do a "release" sprint, you
really just doing a longer sprint with double the planning. Any
developer will start to think in terms of things that can be completed
in 6 weeks instead of 3. Plus, you have a delay in getting feedback.
I personally don't care if we do 3 week sprints or 6 week sprints. But
we shouldn't do a sprint without a release.
BTW, open source methodology just says "release early and release
often". Same concept, really.
One more thing: Next week I'm attending a talk about how LinkedIn
releases to production three times a day. Now that's extreme!
On 1/25/2018 2:11 PM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
Up until now we've released Keycloak roughly every 6 weeks.
switching to 3 week sprints, which opens up the possibility to change how
frequently we release Keycloak.
We could keep it at 6 weeks (release every other sprint), do a release
every 3 weeks or release less frequently (9 weeks perhaps).
keycloak-dev mailing list