Re: Gnome 2 infinity and beyond [was Re: Tango and 2.16]

["Chris Lahey" <clahey clahey net>]

At conferences and LUGs, the marketing message is always about the 6
month release and the idea of just putting off features until the next
version, but what if we combined the two ideas?  Have a release every
6 months as we have been, but plan a set of features for 3.0 and when
we hit that set of features, we change the numbering.  Say we pick a
set of features and in 2008 2.21 happens to match that set of
features.  Instead of going to 2.22, we go to 3.0.  Nice and easy.

Then we pick a set of features for 4.0 and so forth.

What do y'all think?

  Chris

On 4/18/06, Alan Horkan <horkana maths tcd ie> wrote:
>
> There is something I've been meaning to bring up for a few weeks now and
> I'll take Tango as an excuse to finally do it.
>
> Gnome has come a long way since Gnome 2.0 and continues to improve all the
> time.  Changes such as Tango, Cairo, DBUS, Gstreamer, Project Ridley and
> many other initiatives are slowing but surely making Gnome 2.x better very
> very different, to the point where it could be almost unrecognisable from
> Gnome 2.0.
>
> I hope you will forgive the word play in my subject line but in many ways
> it seems like Gnome 2.x could continue on quite happily with releases
> every six months or so until infinity (okay not literally but practically)
> with no sign of when Gnome 3.0 might ever happen.
>
> At the moment the best answer to the question of Gnome 3.0 seems to be
> "maybe later".  Gnome 3.0 (Topaz) not happen if there is no plan*.  The
> way I see it there are two major problems to be solved which I would
> summarise as Developer expectations and user expecations.
>
> Developers have made a commitment to keep ABI stability during the Gnome
> 2.x cycle.  This is a good thing.  This commitment could be extended if
> there was a Gnome 3.0 and to make myself clearer I repeat the point that
> Gnome 3.0 does not need to mean breakage or some wildly new radical idea.
> Development is evolutionary not revolutionary.  [1]
>
> User expectations shot wildly through the roof when the first murmer of
> 3.0 were mentioned.  The work of Project Topaz brilliantly (in my humble
> opinion) helped manage those expecations.  New ideas and energy were
> directed into Gnome 2.x where possible and other ideas were left to cool.
> Which brings us to the present where Gnome 2.16 will be the next release
> and 3.0 is not planned yet.  Managing expecations and keeping them
> realistic (but optomistic) will always be an issue.
>
> I understand the majority** of developers are not particularly interested
> by version numbers but I believe enough people do care about it that it is
> worth discussing what can be done and when it might be appropriate to go
> to the next major version number.  It is mostly marketing, but given a
> little thought it could be made meaningful and need not be just a
> superficial gesture to those who care too much about labelling, it could
> be significant and techincally justifiable.
>
> I return to my point about Gnome being quite different from what it was
> and all the change that have happened.  A developer (an Independant
> Software Vendor (ISV) for example) could create an acceptable gnome 2.x
> application but using older APIs that are supported but not exactly the
> ideally recommended choices.  Gnome 3.0 could be taken as an oportunity to
> clarify best practice and appeal to ISVs which has been previously
> mentioned as something people were interested in.  Gnome 3.0 could be
> taken as a way to celebrate all the progress and encourage people to take
> another look.
>
> Maybe it will be a year or two before Gnome 3.0 happens but I hope
> developers will reconsider Gnome 3.0 and see it as an opportunity and
> begin to make plans or clarify when it might be appropriate to bump the
> major version number in recognition of how far Gnome has come and how much
> as been achieved.
>
> Sincerely
>
> Alan Horkan
>
> Inkscape http://inkscape.org
> Abiword http://www.abisource.com
> Open Clip Art http://OpenClipArt.org
>
> Alan's Diary http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/
>
> * Plan in the vaguest possible sense, the release team and community
> leaders taking a decision is still a plan even if done at short notice.
> ** I assume a majority but I may be mistaken, perhaps there value of
> marketing is understood even though most would rather focus on the real
> work.
>
> [1] Havoc Pennington said it better already
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-May/msg00142.html
>
> I drafted the first version of this message before I saw the comments on
> planet gnome but it seems I'm not the only one thinking about 3.0:
> http://blogs.gnome.org/view/newren/2006/04/18/0
>
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
>