Re: Proposed suite: developer tools

[Tristan Van Berkom <tvb gnome org>]

On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 10:29 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> On 1/8/07, Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org> wrote:
> > This is a thread about the whole suite. This is not about glade3, or
> > anjuta, or monodevelop, or devhelp.
> >
> > The question is: is this suite a good idea or a bad idea?
> 
> As with the others, I like the idea in general.  Another question:
> Should we hold it up to the same standards as e.g. the bindings suite?
>  The bindings suite ran unofficially and in parallel for one cycle to
> give everyone on both sides a chance to see if deadlines and release
> rules could be met without undue difficulty or pain.  Do we want to do
> something similar with the developer tools suite?

My opinion is that modules shouldnt need to feel pressured by release
schedules on the gnome releases if they are not ready. If module
maintainers make promises about features and bugfixes for thier next
stable release then that is thier bussiness - they are not required
to make any such promises, only required to provide a stable version
of software at a predicted point in time.

I am assuming that every module that makes it in the suite has at 
least one stable version available for production - if the next
superduper bugfix/feature-set release isnt ready for gnome 2.x, no need
to feel pressured - when your module is going to be ready & stable
then release the *stable* version in whatever the next gnome
release happens to be (this isnt a /grind/ to get active developers
to be even more active - that would only scare people away IMO).

So for my part - I think holding back might send a message that this
thing is bigger and scarier than it really is (or should be), which is
just better coordination among related projects and better visibility 
of stable releases and schedules.

My 2 cents,
                              -Tristan