Re: 2.3 Proposed Features

[Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc linuxweasel com>]

On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 16:45, Christian Meyer wrote:
[snip]
> > Well that's fine, you can still fix bugs for GNOME 2.6, or in the
> > stable branch of 2.2 or 2.4. There's no reason bugs can only be fixed
> > on HEAD.
> 
> Sure, that's my plan.
>   
> > No, GNOME 2.6 would depend on GTK 2.4.
> 
> Then we'll also have a Gnome 2.8 which will depend on gtk2.4. Are there any
> plans to release gtk2.6? We'd have Gnome 2.10 ;-)

Err, no, not necessarily.  GNOME 2.8 could very easily depend on GTK+
2.6, depending on the timeframe for GTK+.

[snip]

> > You can perfectly well test software with a 6-month cycle, you just
> > have to punt features as required - that's the whole point. We're
> > punting the GTK 2.4 feature here. Because GNOME releases are
> > time-based, not feature-based. The question isn't what time allows us
> > to get in GTK 2.4, it's can GTK 2.4 be done in the time available.
> 
> Fine, I don't have any problems about punting features, but I'm not feeling
> well about punting bugs :-(

Nobody -likes- to punt bugs.  But if you try to fix all of the bugs
before you release, you'll have a really hideously long release cycle. 
Instead, we say "here's when we'd like to release, what bugs can we
realisticly fix by then".  Some bugs can't possibly be punted, so these
bugs end up being the highest priority to get fixed.
	Greg