On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote:
> Planning is also important. > > Time is good, but another thing is i think we should think about, > what features we want to be in new release, and do not release until > they delivered. > I don't really like this. I prefer rhythm, agility. Timeboxing enables maximum value in each release. If a feature is really important, it will be on time. If not on time, it means it was no so important. Always green test is a must-have. > Besides bug fixing and minor improvements, there should be some > functionality which we want to have in new release, > That should be a goal, but don't delay a release because the feature is not here. If releases are often ( for example every 3 months), shorter, it won't be a big problem to wait for the next one. I prefer to have a release *now* without my feature and wait 3 months for the next release than no release and waiting for 3 months more with less and less energy. Laurent. > so then you could say: 1.x is better than previous because of A,B,C, > but not because a,b,c ( capital letters is major stuff, while regular > ones is for minor stuff ) :) > > > On 6 April 2011 10:01, Serge Stinckwich <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:56 PM, laurent laffont > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Yes!!! totally agree. Now that we release 1.2, I would freeze and > release > >>> PharoCore 1.3 beta. Update the link to stable pharo to that, and start > >>> trying to load the dev tools there. > >> > >> +10 > >> And propose a fixed date for release - no compromise, will be release at > >> this date. > > > > +1 > > Timeboxing sounds great. > > Podomoro for software development ;-) > > > > Regards, > > -- > > Serge Stinckwich > > UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC), Hanoi, Vietnam > > Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk > > http://doesnotunderstand.org/ > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > >
