can we hurry up and make a decision?
call a vote with the two options:
1. make 2.1.x be the replacement for 2.0.10... we're making no
promises that there'll be a 2.0.10... the new features will now be in
2.2.x
2. spin a 2.1.0-m1 to get the 2.0.10-tc stuff "out there" and push for
2.1.0 in the next 4 weeks... any features not in 2.1 by then will have
to wait for 2.2... after 4 weeks we start stabilizing until we have a
2.1.0 released
Sent from my iPod
On 29 Aug 2008, at 16:32, "Dan Tran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I must agree with John here. It is hard for me to promote 2.1.0 to
all developers without significant feature enhancements. 2.0.9 works
great for us.
-D
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
As I said before, I very much agree with this.
Ralph
John Casey wrote:
Releasing the current RC work is exactly what I was proposing, and
what I
am proposing now. The only difference was that I changed my own
perspective
on this a little...if we're not introducing new features, there is
very
little to distinguish this RC code from the code in 2.0.x.
Further, if we
plan to introduce new features next, then we're really talking
about having
2.0.x and 2.1.0 be basically the same, no new features for 2.1.1
since
that's bad juju, and then, in 2.2, we finally get some new features.
I guess I see that as a little awkward. Agreed, the work we've done
leading up to this RC process (and into it) has changed quite a
bit of code,
but part of why this RC process has been so long is that we're
taking great
care to make sure it's fully backward compatible. If we were
bringing huge
gains in terms of fixing horrible bugs with this code, I'd say
that 2.1.0 is
great, and any regressions found there could go in 2.1.1, etc. But
the worst
things we're really fixing in this release is performance (it's
better than
2.0.9, not that 2.0.9 was that horrible) and regressions caused by
the
release of 2.0.9.
I'm gambling that the version 2.1.0-M1 won't be too big of a
psychological
hit to keep people from using it; maybe that's off target. In any
case, I
was hoping that by declaring this a M1 and immediately setting up
a 2.1.0
release plan (hopefully before calling the vote for M1), that we
could keep
things on track, get new features for 2.1.0, and avoid having
2.0.10, 2.1.1,
2.2.0, and 3.0 all in the works at the same time. From my
experience of the
activity levels in this project, that would be overreaching. Hell,
we have
plugins that need work and that are pretty badly neglected right
now.
WDYT?
-john
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
