On Sun, Sep 10, 2006, Robert Collins wrote: > So, chatting with Adrian today, and some friends, I have some thoughts > about what precisely 3.0 should be. > > I think 3.0 STABLE1 when release should be: > * more functional than 2.6 STABLEX - there should be no regressions in > functionality. > * within 10-15% of the speed of 2.6 STABLEX.
Agreed. > So heres a proposal: end of october, presuming all bugs are contained, > we release 3.0 FC-1 - which stands for 'Feature Complete'. From now to > then is just bugfixen etc. > > After october, every month or two - lets set a predictable window - we > do FC-2, etc. I like this. > We do *whatever it takes* architecturally and code wise to fix the > release blocking bugs, and to get 3.0's speed sufficiently fast that we > are all happy to call FC-??? STABLE-1. > > That means that large changes which are aimed at performance will be > considered ok during the FC series. I agree with this on principle. We should agree up-front what should be done before we commit large scale changes. We need to concentrate on the bare minimum required to meet our goals. Adrian
