On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If solving these were easy, then I believe they would have been done > by now. We're down to the hard issues, and people don't have a high > degree of confidence in planning when they would be done. We are not the only software project in the world working on hard problems or that finds it difficult to provide estimates. It sucks, but part of being a professional is doing the best you can. We have single-digit issues. We ought to be able to provide a date on when we think the release will be ready and then push each other to meet that deadline. I also have a feeling that people think there are other items not captured in the tracker. That may be true, and I am saying you need to push each other to unlock that information and get it captured in the tracker. > I'm also not seeing anybody here standing up and whipping us into > coming up with a date. People seem pretty content with "we're working > on it as best we can." Consider yourself whipped :) Seriously though, who or what are you expecting? A lot of people have probably just given up or are numb from the 2+ year release cycle we are on. It is not just about declaring a date, hitting it and releasing the software. It is also acknowledging there is an ecosystem downstream that uses the software and has to make their own schedules around it. I would like to be able to do a Subclipse release concurrent with 1.7. I need to be able to budget time to make the adjustments needed for 1.7 and handle my own release process. We use Subversion in our enterprise products and need to be able to plan releases around making Subversion 1.7 available in those products, Give the community a date. If it doesn't look like you can hit the date, then update the community with the new date and move on. It seems like the shame in possibly missing a date is being given too much weight. The community still wants and needs those dates. -- Thanks Mark Phippard http://markphip.blogspot.com/
