Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-09 Thread Gilles
On Thu, 6 Oct 2016 10:36:11 -0700, Gary Gregory wrote: On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Dave Brosius wrote: I'd vote for putting down the paint brushes temporarily and consider the bike shed done. Let's get 1.0 out, and then folks can work on 1.1 while getting

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-07 Thread Eric Barnhill
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Jörg Schaible < joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com> wrote: > Dave Brosius wrote: > > > I'd just release it, and > > get some momentum going. > +1

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-07 Thread Jörg Schaible
Dave Brosius wrote: > i think people understand an early product having breaking changes. The > interface is 'small' enough that having to redo a small amount of change > by clients is not an issue here. Whatever you do, it's likely that you > will get feedback from clients that you don't expect,

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-06 Thread Dave Brosius
i think people understand an early product having breaking changes. The interface is 'small' enough that having to redo a small amount of change by clients is not an issue here. Whatever you do, it's likely that you will get feedback from clients that you don't expect, which probably prompts

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-06 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 6/10/2016 à 19:36, Gary Gregory a écrit : > But is the painting considered for 1.1 in risk of breaking BC? If yes, we > need to keep talking or accept that the next release would be a BC-breaking > 2.0. Both are fine with me, we just need to agree on a road-map. Or we publish now a beta

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-06 Thread Gary Gregory
On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Dave Brosius wrote: > I'd vote for putting down the paint brushes temporarily and consider the > bike shed done. > > Let's get 1.0 out, and then folks can work on 1.1 while getting feedback > from users, etc. > But is the painting considered

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-06 Thread Dave Brosius
I'd vote for putting down the paint brushes temporarily and consider the bike shed done. Let's get 1.0 out, and then folks can work on 1.1 while getting feedback from users, etc. --dave --- On 2016-10-06 11:10, Gilles wrote: On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:04:43 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-06 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 6/10/2016 à 17:10, Gilles a écrit : > Well, you started them. Look, you replied to my message with 100 lines of text, this happens with each of your messages. Sorry but I can't keep up, my time is too limited. Please be synthetic. Emmanuel Bourg

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-06 Thread Gilles
On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:04:43 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 5/10/2016 à 18:01, Gilles a écrit : There hasn't been any repository activity concerned with the above reports or other such new features. Were there unanticipated problems? Just lengthy (and not yet finished) discussions :)

Re: [RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-05 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 5/10/2016 à 18:01, Gilles a écrit : > There hasn't been any repository activity concerned > with the above reports or other such new features. > > Were there unanticipated problems? Just lengthy (and not yet finished) discussions :) I'm still working on the LCG. Emmanuel Bourg

[RNG] Release of v1.0: Schedule update

2016-10-05 Thread Gilles
Hello. Two weeks ago, we informally agreed on a two-weeks delay of the release: http://markmail.org/message/brhdpc5hwjebc2z3 http://markmail.org/message/kpc2brclkr5fyzoo http://markmail.org/message/7fr3aulx4inpplnw in order to accommodate additional RNG implementations: