On 7/14/07, jos poortvliet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Op Saturday 14 July 2007, schreef Troy Unrau: ... > > > I thought that was the plan all along. Why are we arguing about it then? > > > > > > Release Team gets code ready and tells Marketing Team: "here, release it > > > when you find the best time for it". > > > > Yeah, more or less. The only difference is that between the scheduled > > release and the actual party is like three months, so we were assuming > > that there would be substantial improvements to the code in those > > months, especially the translations. But we still wanted that release > > announcement to be about 4.0.0, and the way to do that was to shift > > all the release numbers down by one. The better solution, as > > suggested by a few others, is to simply use release names. > > > > Cheers > > Now onto this proposal: three months. Why do we want it? > Three reasons I can think off: > - Stability. We want to give out a message 'this is ready for corporate use' > - Time. We need time for our release event... > - Features. We need some support from the community for language packs, > plugins, applets, plasmoids and other user-generated stuff. > > I think for marketing, we should focus on the third. If we tell ppl about the > first, they will see our 4.0 release as a release candidate. Of course, we > can mention it later on as an advantage... Second - a bit silly. But the > third...
I don't know if it's because I wasn't at aAkKademy or not, but I'll say it again: as someone who's done software for a long, long time...this discussion makes my head hurt. Every email gets more absurd. I'm more prone at this point to step aside, because I surely can't help with something I don't understand whatsoever. _______________________________________________ release-team mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team
