At conferences and LUGs, the marketing message is always about the 6 month release and the idea of just putting off features until the next version, but what if we combined the two ideas? Have a release every 6 months as we have been, but plan a set of features for 3.0 and when we hit that set of features, we change the numbering. Say we pick a set of features and in 2008 2.21 happens to match that set of features. Instead of going to 2.22, we go to 3.0. Nice and easy.
Then we pick a set of features for 4.0 and so forth. What do y'all think? Chris On 4/18/06, Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is something I've been meaning to bring up for a few weeks now and > I'll take Tango as an excuse to finally do it. > > Gnome has come a long way since Gnome 2.0 and continues to improve all the > time. Changes such as Tango, Cairo, DBUS, Gstreamer, Project Ridley and > many other initiatives are slowing but surely making Gnome 2.x better very > very different, to the point where it could be almost unrecognisable from > Gnome 2.0. > > I hope you will forgive the word play in my subject line but in many ways > it seems like Gnome 2.x could continue on quite happily with releases > every six months or so until infinity (okay not literally but practically) > with no sign of when Gnome 3.0 might ever happen. > > At the moment the best answer to the question of Gnome 3.0 seems to be > "maybe later". Gnome 3.0 (Topaz) not happen if there is no plan*. The > way I see it there are two major problems to be solved which I would > summarise as Developer expectations and user expecations. > > Developers have made a commitment to keep ABI stability during the Gnome > 2.x cycle. This is a good thing. This commitment could be extended if > there was a Gnome 3.0 and to make myself clearer I repeat the point that > Gnome 3.0 does not need to mean breakage or some wildly new radical idea. > Development is evolutionary not revolutionary. [1] > > User expectations shot wildly through the roof when the first murmer of > 3.0 were mentioned. The work of Project Topaz brilliantly (in my humble > opinion) helped manage those expecations. New ideas and energy were > directed into Gnome 2.x where possible and other ideas were left to cool. > Which brings us to the present where Gnome 2.16 will be the next release > and 3.0 is not planned yet. Managing expecations and keeping them > realistic (but optomistic) will always be an issue. > > I understand the majority** of developers are not particularly interested > by version numbers but I believe enough people do care about it that it is > worth discussing what can be done and when it might be appropriate to go > to the next major version number. It is mostly marketing, but given a > little thought it could be made meaningful and need not be just a > superficial gesture to those who care too much about labelling, it could > be significant and techincally justifiable. > > I return to my point about Gnome being quite different from what it was > and all the change that have happened. A developer (an Independant > Software Vendor (ISV) for example) could create an acceptable gnome 2.x > application but using older APIs that are supported but not exactly the > ideally recommended choices. Gnome 3.0 could be taken as an oportunity to > clarify best practice and appeal to ISVs which has been previously > mentioned as something people were interested in. Gnome 3.0 could be > taken as a way to celebrate all the progress and encourage people to take > another look. > > Maybe it will be a year or two before Gnome 3.0 happens but I hope > developers will reconsider Gnome 3.0 and see it as an opportunity and > begin to make plans or clarify when it might be appropriate to bump the > major version number in recognition of how far Gnome has come and how much > as been achieved. > > Sincerely > > Alan Horkan > > Inkscape http://inkscape.org > Abiword http://www.abisource.com > Open Clip Art http://OpenClipArt.org > > Alan's Diary http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/ > > * Plan in the vaguest possible sense, the release team and community > leaders taking a decision is still a plan even if done at short notice. > ** I assume a majority but I may be mistaken, perhaps there value of > marketing is understood even though most would rather focus on the real > work. > > [1] Havoc Pennington said it better already > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-May/msg00142.html > > I drafted the first version of this message before I saw the comments on > planet gnome but it seems I'm not the only one thinking about 3.0: > http://blogs.gnome.org/view/newren/2006/04/18/0 > > _______________________________________________ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list >
_______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
