Re: gnome 2.27/2.29 schedule proposal

[Andre Klapper <ak-47 gmx net>]

Am Freitag, den 27.02.2009, 05:40 +0100 schrieb Vincent Untz:
> Le samedi 21 février 2009, à 18:29 +0100, Andre Klapper a écrit :
> > http://live.gnome.org/AndreKlapper/Sched1 .
> 
> What about this change:
[...]

Good idea. Done.

> Some comments:
> 
>  + eds dbus for 2.27.1? Isn't this optimistic?

Nah, it's just "challenging". :-P
Well, two weeks ago when I talked to Ross this sounded quite possible.

>  + zeitgeist release for 2.27.1? Do you think it's ready?

No. But I want a tarball so it will receive more testers, and Leif said
that there will be a release in the next two months.
But I'm going to remove zeitgeist, it's not really something milestone
worthy and I should really concentrate on covering the platform.

>  + the libglade part could be a bit more aggressive
>  + there's no applets in gnome-shell. So no porting :-)

Ah. Never tried gnome-shell myself. Good to know.

>  + it's unrealistic to break APIs in 2.29.1 all at once. We have to do
>    that library by library, else it will be really painful for
>    everybody. So better to list all libraries needing this, and try to
>    fit each of them in the schedule.

That actually requires feedback from module maintainers, e.g. "when we
can expect a bonobo-free gnome-panel?".
Targetted bonobo-free gnome-panel for 2.29.1 now.

>  + 2.29.5 seems late for the a11y infrastructure. I'd do that for 2.29.2
>    or .3.

Yupp, better. Changed. Though probably too optimistic.

>  + what kind of regressions are we ready to accept for a11y?

No idea. Better to keep this generally vague until a11y folks have come
up with a plan (2.27.1 is deadline for this).

> We'd probably have more stuff to insert (eg: all libraries should
> provide the relevant gobject introspection data), but well, that's a
> good start.

The question that always comes up: How to track this?

> For unmaintained modules, I propose we announce them, and if there's no
> volunteer, someone from the release team should become interim
> maintainer (ie review patches and roll tarballs).

Who defines "unmaintained"?
There's lots of maintainers AWOL (away without official leave).
I *consider* for example alacarte, dasher, gnome-mag unmaintained, but
maintainers may have a different definition of unmaintained than i have.
I've started committing patches without waiting for review to modules
that *I* consider unmaintained.
gnome-system-tools for example is at least *officially* unmaintained.


I'm going to include the stuff listed into the schedule table itself so
we got something to show when negotiating about the backing by companies
in the next weeks.
Volunteers for negotiating? If not, I will fsck it up myself and ping
Stormy to discuss that.

andre
-- 
 mailto:ak-47 gmx net | failed
 http://www.iomc.de/  | http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper