RE: recent article

[Gregory Leblanc <GLeblanc cu-portland edu>]

>I think it's a good reminder that you have to get it right the 
>first time.
>
>gnome is high profile..  Lot's of people looking at it.  If you give
>them
>a hyped 1.0 release, lot's of people will try it..  And first
>impressions are important..  People remember them..  I tried kde a while
>back and hated it..  I've never tried it again although I've heard it's
>far better now..
>
>I think gnome needs a rock solid stable release for people to try..
>A lot of people will want to use gnome so that it will be hassle free..
>The rest of us don't mind living on the cutting edge..
>
>The problem is there needs to be a distinction..
>
>I'm thinking that it might be worthwhile to consider splitting to a 1.0
>and 1.1 series..  That way people who want stability can take a 1.0, and
>those that want the latest can grab the 1.1

I agree.  The way that the linux kernel is broken into two separate 
releases with one being developmental, and the other stable, is the best
way to ensure that people have a stable product.  And stability is the 
biggest reason I can think of to get away from MSFT products.

>
>I'd also suggest doing a prelease of all 1.0  to the mailing list to
>iron out bugs before making a general release..  A desktop is
>fundamental,
>and must be stable.  New people will judge heavily by this criteria
>
>Ryan