Re: Gtk/Gnome release schedules
- From: Luis Villa <louie ximian com>
- To: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>
- Cc: Jody Goldberg <jody gnome org>, desktop-devel-list gnome org, Release Team <release-team gnome org>
- Subject: Re: Gtk/Gnome release schedules
- Date: 04 Feb 2003 19:00:37 -0500
On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 18:55, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 06:38:21PM -0500, Jody Goldberg wrote:
> > If gtk needs longer than 6 months for 2.4 fine, its nice to know
> > that up front. Why not make gnome 2.4 a longer cycle to correspond
> > to the planned 2.4 period.
>
> Assuming we want to match gtk/gnome period, we want the same period
> for gtk/gnome but not in sync. Right now they're in sync. So we would
> need to do either:
>
> a) GNOME 2.4 in 6 months, GTK 2.4 in 9, GNOME 2.6 in 12, GTK 2.6 in 15
> ^ (with filesel/menus/toolbar/combo)
FWIW, there seems to be some consensus that GNOME2.6 in 12 months is a
bad idea, given that that would again be a late January release.
Otherwise, this seems pretty reasonable.
Note that we should maybe think about doing not just gtk on this
schedule- nothing that has been said so far about gtk does not apply to
a lot of the rest of the devel platform.
Luis
Luis
>
> or
>
> b) GNOME 2.4 in 9 months, GTK 2.4 in 6, GNOME 2.6 in 15, GTK 2.6 in 12
> ^ (punting everything but filesel)
>
> and then we'll have things arranged more nicely.
>
> Both a) and b) imply that GNOME 2.6 will be able to use new
> menu/toolbar/filesel APIs in their final GTK form, vs. some internal
> library.
>
> b) implies that GNOME 2.4 will be able to use the filesel API
> in final GTK form.
>
> b) has a longer schedule for GNOME 2.4 which has a list of
> disadvantages I've already complained about at length.
>
> Both plans punt at least some features to the 15 month timeframe.
>
> Honestly, it's probably close to a tossup.
>
> Your mail almost seems to suggest:
>
> c) GNOME 2.4 in 12 months, GTK 2.4 in 9, GNOME 2.6 in 18, GTK 2.6 in 15
>
> if you meant that, that one seems worse than a) or b) to me. In
> particular I see no advantage to it vs. a) - it basically just skips a
> GNOME release we could make in the summer, for no good reason.
>
> So I dislike c).
>
> Havoc
> _______________________________________________
> release-team mailing list
> release-team gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team
>
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]