<quote who="Luis Villa"> > Oh, and after the last time we did this, the release team swore mighty > oaths to never depend on a released-close-to-gnome-schedule GTK again, > since it jeopardizes our release schedule for something that is less > tested than the rest of the stack and which in many cases isn't widely > used because developers haven't had time to integrate it. I suppose we > could reconsider that, but we did it the last time for the same reasons > Mark listed, more or less. As a result we had to delay our release and > (speaking with my QA hat on) after .0 we still had to track down several > issues in gtk that were caused by rushing out a component low-in-the-stack > with insufficient real-world testing. > > So, yeah, I'm pretty strongly against this, though I'm open to persuasion.
Oh, and I thought I was the most vocal and conservative about this. :-) How stupid would it be to optionally depend on the new API goodies, so we have the chance to ship 2.6 if needs be? - Jeff -- OSCON 2005: August 1st-5th http://conferences.oreillynet.com/os2005/ "I tried to make money ass signing, but the bottom fell out of the market." - Liam Quin _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
