Garance A Drosihn wrote:

> At 5:02 PM -0500 8/27/01, Jim Bryant wrote:
>> Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>>> We can't just keep pushing back the release date because "some
>>> very important enhancements" could be made.  It will ALWAYS be
>>> true that there are more "very important enhancements" on
>>> the horizon, and you can't keep running after those.  You have
>>> to pick some point, and stick to that point, and "ship" at that
>>> point.  As long as current is known to be in rapid flux, most
>> I'm glad you support integration of KSE then...  As I recall such
>> threading was in the original design specs for 5.0, as released
>> when work on 5.0 began.
> I'm disappointed that you completely misunderstood what I intended
> to say in the above.  My point is that sometimes you have to stick
> to a "ship date" because you have to stick to that date, and not
> because you stick to some list of features that you'd like to see.
> The longer you let ship-dates slip, the longer you end up without
> a release-quality product.

I to this day still think that was the reasoning behind the Thanksgiving [An American 
Holiday] release of 2.0-R.  What a disaster!

I know for a fact that MickeySoft has had this philosophy since at least Win-95..  
What a disaster!

Marketing people screaming about ship-dates are the prime cause of unstable software, 
IMHO.  Software should be shipped when design 
goals are met, not before.

Last I heard, 4.4-R is RSN...  Why should there be a mad rush to release 5.0-R 
practically right after 4.4-R, especially if it's not 
yet ready for prime-time?  At the rate things are going, even WITH KSE integrated, 
5.0-R should be close to the currently projected 
release date.

I forget... Wasn't the *ORIGINAL* release date for 5.0-R slated for early-2002?  What 
happened to that?  Marketing types step in?

> I think a lot of good work has gone into the current cut at KSE
> support, and I certainly hope it goes in.  However, there are a
> number of other factors to consider.  The right way to get KSE in
> 5.0 is to help do the work which is necessary for that to happen,
> and not to deliberately misquote people -- as you are pretty
> clearly doing in the above.  What I explicitly said in the above
> message (and which you explicitly deleted) was that KSE should
> wait for a later release if the remaining work is not done.  If
> you have some other opinion, that is fine, but do not reword *my*
> opinion to claim that I agree completely with your opinion.

It was an asinine reply to an asinine comment, not a deliberate misquotation.

> Julian did a lot of good work, all he needs is a few more
> developers to help test that work.  None of us need a thread
> arguing about release dates vs some goals set two years ago.

Somehow I see the GOP using that same argument next year concerning the tax-scam...  
Medicare surplus wiped out, 9 billion into 
Social Security starting next week...  oops, off topic...

I agree with you to a point there.  The design goals should be met.  This isn't a 
commercial product, and thus I don't see that the 
argument that the release date should be set in stone is relevant, although it should 
be close to that which was originally specified.

> I "support" the integration of KSE in the sense that I intend to
> help test it (on a dual-CPU i386) sometime in the next week.  I
> do not support a delay of "5.0".  I can not test on Alpha, as I
> have no Alpha machines.  Anyone who wants to prove their support
> for KSE in 5.0 should step up and offer to do some of the testing,
> etc.  Actions will speak louder than any (misquoted) words.

Again, I agree, except I still don't understand your dire need for a mad rush to have 
another "Thanksgiving release" a la 2.0-R. 
FreeBSD releases should be goal-oriented, not marketing-type oriented.

2.0-R left FreeBSD with reputation damage that took several years to clear up, I would 
have thought that some had learned from that 
"stick to the release date" experience.  My first experience with -current sprang from 
that experience [for a while -current was 
more stable than -RELEASE, on freaking production systems].  It didn't take too long 
to get -RELEASE stable though, as I recall.

Marketing types have a place: Selling RELEASED software and hardware...  They should 
not be the end-all word on ship dates though.

Hell, the Pentium 4 was a nice concept until...

ET has one helluva sense of humor!
He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos!

Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free address at

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to