Pavel Janík wrote: > From: James McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 10:14:18 -0700 > >Hi, > > > Now I see your point. It is up to Ericb what he wants to do. > >no again. Our project is about to release 2.0 next week. What we have next >week will be released as 2.0. If we want something new in next version >(2.0.1), we have to provided it via development (cws, qa, ...). Then it can >be in released product. > > Pavel:
I was not aware of the release schedule for OOo 2.0. I definately feel that the launcher capabilities should be there for the release, but if it is too late, then it should be incorporated into 2.0.1 and it definately should go through the QA process (cws, qa, etc.) I'm not suggesting that this process be bypassed, rather it should be followed. I suggested that Ericb put his changes into another macosx cws for QA and if they make it into the 2.0 release that would be fantastic. If they do not, they should be in 2.0.1. Again, it is up to Ericb and his personal schedule if he can construct a cws that can be QA'd before the release. If his schedule cannot allow this, I understand and will not be dissatisfied. In any case, the QA process should not be forced just to make a release date (I've been the victim of the corruption of the QA process.) James McKenzie --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
