On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 03:47:30PM +0000, Tim Larson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 04:21:09PM +0100, Reinhard P?tz wrote: > > > > As you may saw I've reverted the removal of Woody. IMO just for now and > > it should be removed ASAP. So let's vote on this: > > > > variant A: remove Woody after 2.1.5 release > > > > variant B: remove Woody after 2.1.6 release > > > > variant C: leave Woody where it is and mark it as "won't change" > > > > > > Your votes please! > > > > -- > > Reinhard > > > > +1 to freeze the Woody directory via permissions or CVS right now. > +1 to keep it at least for the 2.1.5 release. > +1 to query the users ml after the 2.1.5 release to see if > there is any reason to keep it for one more release (2.1.6). > > We have to remember that even though we state that Woody is alpha, > there is a pretty large installed userbase already. We have to be > nice to them to keep them with us during transitions like this. > > Please see my email about documenting practices and policies if > you wonder why I care so much about this. > > --Tim Larson
A few more points: +1 to keep the Woody* wiki pages and any other Woody documentation for as long as we keep the Woody block. +0 Freeze the Woody documentation. I only rate this +0 because even though the code is frozen, the documentation may still need clarifications and fixes. +1 to let bug fixes (not new features) into the Woody block. --Tim Larson
