Op dinsdag 14 juni 2011 01:02:51 schreef Michael Scherer: > Le lundi 13 juin 2011 à 15:51 +0300, Thomas Backlund a écrit : > > Wolfgang Bornath skrev 13.6.2011 15:20: > > > About the cycles: > > > > > > The 9-months seem to be a compromise - but I start to ask why we need > > > such a fixed statement (which it would be, once published). We need a > > > schedule for each cycle, that's true. Without a schedule we would > > > never finish anything. But how about taking 9 months only as a "nice > > > to meet" target, leaving us the option to set a roadmap after setting > > > the specs of the next release - we could then go for a 8 or 10 months > > > roadmap, depending on the specs. > > > > This is somewhat like what I had in my mind to write too, but you beat > > me to it :) > > > > It could allow us to adapt a little for upstream releases. > > But should we then decide that the limit is +/- 1 month ? > > There is 2 problem : > - for release of what software ? > - what if the upstream planning is wrong, and their releases is late > ( as it happened when I was a trainee in Mandrakesoft, with xfree being > 3 months late and the distribution still shipping a broken pre release ) > > > Obviously there will still be people complaining that "you waited 10 > > months... if you had extended with ~2 more weeks... "this" or "that" > > package would have been available too... and so on.... > > Yes, there will be. > So let's be realist, 9 months with +/- 1 month is just 10 months + > people complaining to have 10,5 months. > > We will never use the -1 month, because there will always be something > worth waiting.
actually, the real reason would be more to plan for whatever features you're going to implement and the time it takes to do them. if that's 8 months, it's 8 months, if that's 9 or 10months, that's what it is. We proved that we can take a planning and follow it through, even the last release_critical one was solved _just_in_time_... imho, we need to decide now on a sort of 9month period, look at what we're going to do, then estimating how long it takes (with enough lenience), then make a real planning for that, and stick to it, if features are not ready, drop those features for next release, and make sure to fix all the release_criticals.
