Hi.

To summarize the feedback from the European time zone, I think that the
proposal in general meets the favor of everyone.

The controversial issue is the exact version number to use for the
release. There seems to be broad support for freeing the current Plone
trunk from a version designator and release a 4.0 release with the
envisioned scope of this proposal instead.

If I do not get a strong signal or message otherwise, consider this
proposal changed in this regard.

Hanno

Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> While everyone is waiting for Plone 4 and its rather long timeline, some
> people have been thinking about how to bridge the gap between the
> current stable 3.x releases and the future.
> 
> The general idea that seems to have met some consensus is to go for a
> Plone 3.5 release up next. We'd skip any 3.4 release and go for a 3.5
> that is similar in spirit to the Plone 2.5 release. It tries to both
> refresh some of our technical underpinnings in addition to some more
> intrusive feature changes we didn't allow ourselves in the 3.x series so
> far.
> 
> In order to frame the scope of such a release I made a listing of some
> of the potential features for such a release at
> http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=rFHYANxtkRfGYchi1QuS5dA. The list
> is both non-exclusive and non-binding in the recommendations.
> 
> The envisioned timeline for a Plone 3.5 release would be to aim for a
> final release either by the time of the conference or by the end of this
> year, giving us six months or a bit more for it. By aiming for an
> after-summer beta deadline we will have a chance of leveraging some
> Google Summer of Code contributions for such a release.
> 
> When it comes to the official personal involved in such a new major
> release, I'd like to suggest a slight deviation on our process. As many
> to all of the features changes in question for the 3.5 release have so
> far been in the scope of the 4.0 release, I'd suggest to appoint the
> entire 4.0 framework team to be the official team for 3.5 as well. This
> forces them to get involved with the process in a more defined and clear
> way now.
> 
> On the side of the release manager, Wichert has signaled that his
> workload as a freelancer will not allow him to take over the shepherding
> of a new major release. We do however have with Eric Steele of PSU fame
> a well-known interested candidate for the position.
> 
> This is only a proposal that needs community feedback and encouragement
> at this point to make it into an official roadmap. The next steps are to
> have an open discussion about this for the next one to two weeks. If it
> meets general favor, we will appoint the new/old framework team and let
> them recommend a release manager to the Foundation board for official
> nomination.
> 
> Cheers,
> Hanno
> 


_______________________________________________
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team

Reply via email to