Re: GNOME 2.12
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> Yes, I agree with Alejandro. GNOME has a fixed release schedule and we
> don't. And though we can think that we are going to release in 18 months
> from Sarge release (which would be great), spending a lot of time in
> 2.10 is a waste of time, as for sure Etch is going to be released with
> at least 2.12. If we were just 2 months far from release, making this
> would be acceptable, but not just now.
I suppose you have seen how much time it took to get gnome-vfs2 in
testing and what a pain it was not being able to upload packages
depending on gnome-vfs2 for more than 2 months. If you recall that,
you certainly are sensible to the list of ongoing transition (which are
not necessarily GNOME ones).
I checked with the release team what they would think of a Gtk
transition (2.6 -> 2.8) right now, and they said it wouldn't be very
reasonable. I didn't ask for GNOME 2.12, but I imagine what the
response would be, be it with or without the Gtk transition.
> With this, I am not saying that GNOME 2.10 should be abandoned, but
> that 2.12 should start to be packaged and uploaded. Or it will happen
> that closer to our release, GNOME 2.14 is going to be released and we
> will want to include it in Etch, forcing people to jump from 2.10 to
> 2.14, which usually is more difficult and errors prone.
As I proposed, why don't you comment on the way I proposed the schedule
instead of proposing a brand new "let's upload G2.12, yeepee!" plan?
Cheers,
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
Reply to: