On 29 Jul 2001 02:28:52 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > I have been thinking about the plans for the next release and > about the long way we had to go for 2.4. Dan is absolutely right > when he wants to find a way to establish a shorter release cycle. > 2.4 took to much time and I doubt I have the endurace for such an > herculean effort again. There are a *lot* of things that were > postponed until after 2.4 that could be done now. All the small > enhancement requests and bug fixes alone may justify another > release. > > I believe 2.4 got out of hand because we tried to do everything at > once at first and then there were too many dependencies in the > code to be resolved so that we could not release although we > wanted to. It may be better to plan for a 2.6 release that comes > up with many small enhancements, bug fixes and maybe even some of > the bigger but less disruptive features. A new stable release > within half of a year semms to be a good plan to me. > > What do you think?
If we already go for 2.6 in some months, maybe grab cvs before Xinerama commits and release 2.4.1 based on it? The current one may become 2.5.0. This is somewhat similar to what I and Olivier suggested previously. Regards, Mikhael. -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
