In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Stepan Mishura" writes: > > On 4/24/08, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Ellison writes: > > > > > > I'm really not convinced this is a good idea for Harmony, and my > > > concerns are in two parts: > > > > > > 1) Our schedule should not be dictated by an external project, > > > especially when it is their process that seems to be setting the > > > artificial time limit. Why not show some flexibility to meet our > > > dates? > > > > > > 2) Our principle delivery mechanism is source code. While we make > > > binaries available as a convenience we should not encourage dependents > > > to put dependencies on our build tools. They should take source and > > > compile it themselves for their own environment. > > > > I agree with Tim on this issue. I think making a release, with the > > testing, evaluation and voting involved, should not be something that > > downstream projects dictate. Doing this release would seem to set a > > precedent that I would not be happy with. > > > > I would be inclined to vote -1 for any formal release that isn't simply > > the next milestone release. Of course, this is not necessarily my final > > decision. > > > > The downstream project should use our current release or if they have > > a desperate need for something more recent then they should be more > > flexible. > > > > It makes me sad :-(
Sorry. > We ask another project to be more flexible but we are not ready to be > flexible too - we scheduled M6 to mid of May and we couldn't move it > to the end of April. That is unfair. That is not what I've said. I did not say we couldn't move the M6 release date. I've not stated an opinion on that one way or the other. However, my statement about "voting -1 for any formal release that isn't simply the next milestone" was intended to allow for this possibility. > We are discussing the request almost for 2 weeks (this time is enough > to make full milestone testing cycle) and I've not heard any strong > argument for having it in mid of May expect that we scheduled it to > this date. ;-( Moving our milestone doesn't necessarily imply more work for everyone while doing an extra release certainly does. Hence I am more flexible about the former. The latter seems like another project forcing us to do more work to get around their inflexible policy which is definitely wrong to me. I hope that is clearer and makes you a little less sad. Regards, -Mark.
