Re: [draft] Planning for GNOME 3.0

[Luis Villa <luis tieguy org>]

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org> wrote:
>> I might add some language (perhaps to the section on testing?)
>> stressing that our time-based releases are also always quality-based
>> releases- the QA team has always reserved the right to delay releases
>> that aren't ready. Maybe this will be the first time the QA team has
>> ever had to use that. ;)
>
> Ooooh, love it. I changed the paragraph related to this to:
>
> Of course, we should be prepared to consider the fact that GNOME 2.30
> might not be good enough for us to call it 3.0. All of our time-based
> releases are also quality-based releases: if the QA team feels a release
> should be delayed, then it will be delayed. In the context of 3.0, this
> is something that we should be ready to diagnose early on during the
> 2.29 development cycle and we should not be afraid of keeping GNOME 2.30
> as 2.30 and waiting for GNOME 2.32 for the 3.0 release, for example.
> That being said, we want the community to try as hard as possible to
> make "GNOME 2.30 = GNOME 3.0" a success.

Good!

I might suggest that someone needs to take up the task of cultivating
a new, forceful leader for the QA team- 'involved' GNOME leaders
should be feeling out who is really doing work there, talking to them,
making them feel like part of the team, and then making them the
formal bridge to that group. (How this worked for me was that Telsa
found me on IRC, got my phone number, called me, and said 'would you
like to be on release-team?' :)

Might be one of the Ubuntu QA folks, dunno, but in order for this to
work someone has to have the guts to stand up to everyone else and say
'no'. This was my job during 2.0, and I enjoyed it, but someone would
have to offer me a lot of money to do it again ;)

Luis