Amos Jeffries wrote: > We don't exactly date things here. With everyone working on voluntary > time its unpredictable. Though there has been a fairly regular 4-week > cycle for new X.Y.0.z beta releases. > > For planning and upgrade testing, 3.1.0.6 is a fairly stable point to > begins with. > > Back before we/I decided to adopt the fluid feature inclusion we had a > set of approved features for 3.1. The last of these given a guarantee of > being in 3.1 is still grinding it's way through testing (far too > slowly). I expect that will take us through March and maybe April before > 3.1 gets a chance of even starting the stable waiting period. > > There is also a short list of RC bugs which we consider major enough to > need fixing before we call it stable. > Many of these bugs are only confirmed to exist in 3.0. But they are > serious enough that we really NEED someone who can see them in 3.0 to > test 3.1 and confirm they are not still hiding. > > Last time I had to guesstimate a timeline I said mid-year (june/july) > 2009, I've seen no reason to change it for better or worse yet. > > Amos Thank you for your answer Amos. This is exactly what i wanted to know. -- Matthias
