Hi, Brian Cameron wrote: >> Quoting myself: >> "Many users think "major version bump" is synonymous with "significant >> new features"." > > "Many" is a fuzzy word. How many is many?
Deliberately fuzzy... I avoided "most people" or "most people I know", although I believe both would be true. > Whether a user would find a GNOME 2.24 renamed to GNOME 3.0 release > exciting would probably depends on what version the user was > previously using. If they were using 2.6 (or something similarly old), > they might feel the wealth of new features warrants the major release > bump. Users coming from GNOME 2.22 might not feel the same. Sure. I'm merely pointing out that the wealth of new functionality which has come into GNOME since 2.0, 6 years ago, is worth a major version bump. The 6 month release cycle means it's happened in small steps, and thus we have never had the occasion to recognise the big leaps forward. > I am not opposed to doing a 3.0 release, mind you. I just think that > a 3.0 release should involve more coordination than just deciding to > rename GNOME 2.24 to "3.0". In my opinion, a 3.0 release should make > some effort to take GNOME to the next level. It should not be done > because a "major release hasn't happened in a long time, and the KDE > team did one." I mostly agree. I just think that we set the bar too high for major version number bumps. ... > We should coordinate our 3.0 efforts so that we have some substance to > back it up. There seem to be things in the pipeline that would warrant > a 3.0 release in the non-too-distant future. Why not just hold off > until then? Will you remind us when we get there? ;-) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
