Sheila and Mimi put together proposals that identify "phases" for each
0.7 tenet. Each phase is a somewhat coherent set of features that are
testable, and that an end user could experiment with.
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-February/004105.html
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-February/004108.html
They've also identified priorities for calendar improvements, a proposal
for which work gets done first:
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/design/2006-February/004065.html
Heikki, Lisa, Alec and others have been arguing strongly for shorter
releases, and I think there is general agreement that we'd like to have
something stable that a user could play with before we finish the whole
scope of 0.7 work we have in front of us.
Putting this together, I'd like to propose that we have longer, more
stable milestones during the 0.7 timeframe, and that we think about each
milestone as a mini-release (alpha release, if you will). Strawman proposal:
+ Milestones are ~2 months apart, and feature driven.
+ Each phase proposed by Sheila and Mimi falls into a milestone. (We
could make adjustments once we scope out the work -- one phase could
take two milestones if it had to or we could do two phases in one
milestone if they fit).
+ We spend more time testing and stabilizing each milestone.
+ We provide a path to migrate data from milestone to milestone.
+ The expectation is that dogfood users could download the milestone and
use it.
+ We could use the term "alpha" instead of "milestone" (a nod to
previous discussions about milestone release numbering).
Thoughts?
We still need to do more work on bottom up planning to put real dates on
this and see if it works out, but if we have agreement on the general
idea it will provide a structure for the bottom up planning.
Cheers,
Katie
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
