On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 14:55 -0500, Chris McDonough wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 17:32 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote:


> Also, it sounds as if there's an argument being made that *everyone*
> should pitch in to get 2.9 beta out the door *instead* of committing
> Zope 2 feature work and the delayed branching is the manifestation of
> "legislation" that aims to make this happen. 

Yup. You figured it out.

> I'm not sure it's healthy
> to legislate this. 

I'm not sure either, but we have to try something.

>  There are people who have no burning desire to see a
> 2.9 go out the door within the next few weeks, but OTOH they are very
> willing to commit some valuable feature work right now for an eventual
> 2.10 release and due to the freeze, they haven't done so (and may never
> do so if not now, given the volunteer-ness of their efforts). 

OK, then there will be less for the people who are willing to fix bugs
to work on later.

>  How can
> we accomodate those people in the future? 

They can always work on a development branch.

>  IMO, we should try not to
> discourage contribution and so we should branch regardless of the state
> of the trunk within, say, two weeks of freeze.  Does that sound
> reasonable for future releases?

Not to me.


Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to