Re: 2.33 schedule draft

Le vendredi 13 août 2010, à 16:18 +0200, Andre Klapper a écrit :
> Am Freitag, den 13.08.2010, 13:38 +0200 schrieb Vincent Untz:
> >  + do we want to use 2.91 instead of 2.90, as discussed on d-d-l?
> Yes.
> >  + 2.90.2 is due on the last of the Boston Summit. I'm wondering if this
> >    is an issue or not. I don't really see how we can change this, so
> >    maybe we should simply ignore it?
> >    (swapping 2.90.2 and 2.32.1 is even worse, imho)
> Proposal:
> * Move 2.90.2 from w06 to w07
> * Move 2.32.1 from w07 to w08
> * Move 2.90.3 from w09 to w10

This makes only two weeks betwen 2.90.3 and 2.90.4, while this is the
period where there are 3 weeks between releases. I'm not sure it's good;
I think I prefer to have 2.90.2 during the Boston Summit; it might not
be that important (especially for a .2).

> >  + not for 3.0, but for 3.2: I'd like us to stop releasing on the last
> >    day of the month. It'd be nice to release at the middle of the month,
> >    like we used to do. This will also help distributors a bit, I guess.
> Proposal:
> * Move 2.90.6 from w18 to w17 (and resp. everything after by 1w)

As I said, I think we shouldn't do this for 3.0 but for 3.2. It's good
that we keep that time for 3.0.

> >  + new modules proposal period starts next Monday. My first reaction was
> >    that it's a bit early, especially since we might want to make people
> >    focus on making rock-solid the current 3.0 stuff. But on the other
> >    hand, that's a good way to keep the 3.0 goal in mind. Are you going
> >    to send the mail about this?
> I can do that on Monday or Tuesday, IF we agree on something in the
> module reorg thread on this mailing list.

Not going to happen before Monday/Tuesday. So I suggest pushing back the
opening of the new modules proposal period to the week after (or even to
two weeks after).


Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]