On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 23:42 +0100, Andrew Sobala wrote: > On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 17:20 -0400, JP Rosevear wrote: > > There could or could not be significant issues in 2.7. The point is its > > not certain and it introduces significant *risk* to the schedule. We > > went through the same thing with 2.6 and it seems we learned nothing, > > see your own original view: > > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-June/msg00020.html > > > > As well as Andrew's: > > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-June/msg00022.html > > Just for reference, the main differences between 2.6 and 2.8 are their > stability and completeness *at this point* in the release cycle - ie. > the point at which we are committing to one. 2.8 appears to be more > stable and complete than 2.6 was.
Oh, the other point is that the GTK+ team are, this time, very confident that they will stick to their schedule. They were definitely not for 2.6. The advantage of testing GNOME with the GTK+ version that will be released simultaneously with it means that the combination that is blatantly going to be seen in the wild will be tested, rather than not testing GTK+ at all. This is basically Owen's second point from here: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-June/msg00070.html and it's very convincing. Don't forget it. -- Andrew _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list