Hi, On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 16:54 +0000, William Skaggs wrote: > A roadmap should be thought of as a component of a full development > strategy. In my view, each release cycle should have a set of target > dates, and a set of essential accomplishments. Well, we have that for 2.6. We didn't put publish it. But we discussed these points and agreed on a roadmap for 2.6. The question is, do we gain anything if we published such a roadmap officially? I am afraid that the only result would be that people will expect us to stick to the release date no matter how far the essential features are developed. And at the same time they will expect us to implement all the essential features. > The main value of a roadmap, in this context, is in planning for > future release cycles. Thus, the roadmapping that should be going > on now is for 2.8 and beyond, not for 2.6. Agreed. The 2.6 development cycle is soon coming to an end and we should start to talk about what can still be achieved and what should happen next. The question is still, do we really want to make a roadmap public? I think it would be a lot more useful if we would just collect a list of tasks that we consider important, without sticking them into a particular release time-frame. That will make it easier for new developers to participate. And that's what's most important. Sven _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
