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

[Alan Horkan <horkana maths tcd ie>]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Brent Smith wrote:

> Chris Lahey wrote:

> > 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
> >
> [snip]
>
> I think if we are targeting features,

... no not really, I wasn't suggesting targeting features any more than is
done within the current 6 month release cycle.

To rephrase what I said before Gnome 2.x is moving further and further
away from Gnome 2.0.  A change in major number would recognise that
difference and be an opportunity to make it clear what is recommended and
what is deprecated.  (No I'm not advocating breakage, I hope compatibility
can be maintained as lot as it is practical to do so and maybe a while
longer.)

-- 
Alan H.