Re: Stricter policy when including BIG modules

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 17:51, Danilo Segan wrote:
> > I don't think that you have actually suggested any particular action or
> > process. Feel free to describe it in 1 or 2 official-sounding sentences
> > so we can see what it feels like.
> 
> Ok, let me try again.
> 
> "If a module proposed for inclusion in Gnome requires substantial
> effort by many subteams of Gnome development (such as translation,
> documentation, UI review teams), and there's a real risk of that
> module being withdrawn after the final module list is announced, then
> don't include that module in the release."

Thanks. I think I'm still against this, because the module would just be
added a few months later and the work would not be wasted. You might ask
translators to give old modules higher priorities than new modules, if
you are worried about where the effort goes.
  
[snip]

> Yes, this big module would have 1 month less than the other components
> to get to a feature-full, stable state, but that's the price of it
> being so huge.

I think the current "punt it if it can't meet the schedule" gives a
module enough (even too much) time to get in sync with the schedule. I
don't think it's a good idea to have lots of special rules for corner
cases. We should keep it simple and not get in the way.

Murray Cumming
www.murrayc.com
murrayc murrayc com