On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Neels J. Hofmeyr <neels_at_elego.de> wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
>> Personally, I would give the tree conflict folks until first/second
>> week of January (i.e. just post-break) to wrap their work. And by
>> "wrap", I mean finish or cut. I think it is TOTALLY acceptable for us
>> to ship 1.6 in a Jan/Feb timeframe, so I'm more than willing to give
>> them the *proper* time to get the work done and make it solid. I fear
>> that putting this feature "under the gun" will be a bad outcome for
>> everybody. It also seems to be reasonable/close enough that we can
>> take a month or two to get it wrapped (or cut, worst case).
>
> When you say EOY, then that's a whole new story. I was expecting the
> branching to take place tomorrow-ish, us handing in patches onto the branch
> and having to release before christmas. If we can carry on developing "on
> trunk" until christmas, I think that we'll have sufficient tree-conflicts
> usability for a release. Tree-conflicts folks, do you agree?
Note that that is only my opinion. You've gotta convince others to go
that long :-)
Further, I'm good with that only when knowing "what is left? how do we
cut if necessary?" types of questions. In other words, it isn't an
open-ended ticket to churn :-) Some kind of feature description of
what is in/out is still needed -- do you guys really have a handle on
this? Or are we going to continue to bumble along until one day it is
called "done".
I don't really care about the "hard" December date. A month or two is
fine. We want good, and we want stable. Hard rules tend to work
against those goals.
Cheers,
-g
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-16 05:45:25 CET