Aidan Skinner wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have updated with what we have done so far, and a good part is completed.
Can we hash out on this thread and
get M3 more concrete. i.e. are we going to wait for Ruby to support 0-10
before we cut M3, or will we be willing
to cut it with Java, JMS, C++ and .NET clients?
We've previously agreed to do time-boxed releases, which I think is
pretty crucial. We've kind of let it slip recently, but I think
getting an M3 out at an agreed point in time, with clearly defined
feature, bug fix and hard freezes is a better tack to take than trying
to define M3 by features.
I certainly agree with the timeboxing approach in general. My one
concern is the interoperability or lack thereof between the components
of a release. A plan for achieving that in some form would be good to
reach, even if it goes out past M3.
