Re: 2.6 and 2.8 schedules

[Danilo Segan <danilo gnome org>]

Hi Daf,

Dafydd Harries <daf@muse.19inch.net> writes:
>
> I think this sounds promising and I (for one) am certainly happy to give
> this a try for the next cycle.
>

Perhaps you'll update the guidelines for behaving during string
freezes as well, to reflect this change in policy? ;)

(OTOH, I'm not sure how this will work out--we might turn gnome-i18n
into spamming [or cvs-commits :] sort of list, with hundreds of string
changes being announced during slushy-freeze period--but, lets give
it a try ;)

>> 	Feedback/ideas are very welcome. Unless there are any major
>> disagreements we'll go ahead and post the schedule on the website in a
>> few days time.
>
> One of the biggest problems I've seen translators face is that there is
> no set date for translations. It all depends on when the maintainer of
> each module decides to make their own release. There's a latest date for
> this (tarballs due), but not an earliest date, so comitting translation
> updates near the tarball deadline is a gamble. There's nothing to
> prevent a module maintainer making a release/tarball weeks before the
> end of the cycle, thus nullifying all translations submitted afterwards.

That shouldn't happen.  I believe all modules *must* have a separate
release *after* the 1st release candidate.  That pretty much makes the
period you ask for, a week, though it seems strange to have someone
release both a release candidate and final release day or two apart
(so in practice, we'd have at most 2 days less than the final-release
date, and commonly, less than a day).

Cheers,
Danilo