On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 19:51 +0100, Jamie McCracken wrote: > Hubert Figuiere wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month > > release > > schedule of Gnome to do a "major" release with a certain number of feature > > that would involve possible infrastructure changes in the platform. > > > > There have been a large pimping of project Topaz, and I strongly believe > > that > > this is the kind of goal that would need a longer development cycle for a > > big > > leap forward towards world domination. > > > > Why not thinking for after 2.18 starting on a 12 to 18 month release cycle. > > We > > must have a FIRM date (eventually flexible), but more importantly a FIRM > > features goal (eventually adapted to not become a Death March). > > > > What do people think? > > > > I think its worth experimenting with a longer release cycle but I would > start at 9 months and see if that improves things before considering a > 12 month or 18 month cycle. > > I dont know how topaz will transpire but I feel it should be written in > a native high level language like D or Vala as its likely to be a > rewrite of much of the existing code and could be doable in 9 months > with a more productive language. > if we rewrite "much of the existing code", I think we would need much more than 9 months :-) -- Rodrigo Moya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
