Hi, David Neary <dneary@xxxxxxx> writes: > You can certainly spread it around. I update the NEWS now, as > well as you. Anyone can do that. Same thing goes for making the > announcement on freshmeat, gnome-desktop, linuxartist... I can do > bugzilla tags. Well, I am certainly not going to ask for this and so far I have always waited about a day if someone else would post announcements on gnomedesktop and other sites. But it seems that noone but me is interested enough to post there, so I guess I will continue to do that. After all I am interested in people trying the release when I've gone through the trouble of doing one. > I got the point; so I'll repeat mine, and then we can stop. We're > more or less agreed that to have 2.2 by the end of June, we need > to > 1) have 2.0 this month > 2) Branch a stable development branch next month > 3) Feature freeze at the start of April > 4) start pre-releases in the middle of April > 5) Release 2.2 the end of June. That looks like a reasonable time frame. I expect that we will have to extend it a bit but that was the point of starting with a tight schedule. What's missing now is some agreement on what we want to achieve in 2.2 but I think we can as well delay this discussion until 2.0 is finally done. > I don't think there's any argument there. All I did was throw in > a release every couple of weeks between those 5 points. I think > it's helpful to show how little time there will be in this > development cycle. > > > Some real content in the roadmap instead of meaning-less dates would > > be helpful. At perhaps make it a proposal for a roadmap next time. > > This comment got me angry. I've calmed down now. I am sorry, it wasn't every well worded. But your posting got me angry as well and perhaps I didn't take enough time to calm down. > Everything I post to this list that isn't meant to be a fact is an > opinion, and a request for comments. If I say "March 17th is > St. Patrick's Day", that's a fact. If I say "I think we should have > 2.2.0 at the end of June, and I think this is more or less how to > get there", that's opinion. See the difference? I asked for > comments. I even got a couple of positive ones, in e-mails > off-list. Comments off-list don't count. If people want to comment on this subject, they should do it on the list. Everything else is just noise. > How much more proposally would you like it to be? Well, your mail said "here's the roadmap" and that's what will be cited later. If the word proposal would have been used, perhaps even in the Subject, things would have certainly been easier. Sven
