On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 03:59:09PM -0800, Dan Quinlan wrote: > I want to drop the discussion of dates until we agree on the minimal > feature set. We're going to be stuck with many aspects of this release > for a long while, we should do a good job getting it right and not push
I think we're all on the same page here: we're actually talking about
doing the exact same things, except I put some "milestone dates" with
each phase.
My issue is that it feels very much like we're working on stuff without
a real focus of the end goal, and without some form of general guide
pushing us to get to that end goal, we may not get there, or at least
not get there anytime soon.
> a half-assed release out the door because of some vague time pressure.
Absolutely, the proposed schedule wasn't intended to be a hard-set
timeline. It's meant as a focussing guideline. The last thing any of us
want is some crap-hole of a release just so we can say we did a release.
That wouldn't be good for us, the ASF, or the people who'd go using
the code.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
The whole intent of Perl 5's module system was to encourage the growth
of Perl culture rather than the Perl core.
-- Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgp4naD8dRJw2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
