On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 16:54 +0000, William Skaggs wrote:
> A roadmap should be thought of as a component of a full development
> strategy. In my view, each release cycle should have a set of target
> dates, and a set of essential accomplishments.
Well, we have that for 2.6. We didn't put publish it. But we discussed
these points and agreed on a roadmap for 2.6. The question is, do we
gain anything if we published such a roadmap officially? I am afraid
that the only result would be that people will expect us to stick to the
release date no matter how far the essential features are developed. And
at the same time they will expect us to implement all the essential
> The main value of a roadmap, in this context, is in planning for
> future release cycles. Thus, the roadmapping that should be going
> on now is for 2.8 and beyond, not for 2.6.
Agreed. The 2.6 development cycle is soon coming to an end and we should
start to talk about what can still be achieved and what should happen
next. The question is still, do we really want to make a roadmap
I think it would be a lot more useful if we would just collect a list of
tasks that we consider important, without sticking them into a
particular release time-frame. That will make it easier for new
developers to participate. And that's what's most important.
Gimp-developer mailing list