Elijah Newren wrote: > I used to be firmly in favor of the 6-month cycle, but I found > Andrew's argument quite convincing and it has turned me into more of a > fence sitter for now. It isn't yet clear to me that a change would be > a definite improvement, let alone enough of a benefit to merit the > change in the process, but that may well change.
I think this is why an alternating 6 and 12 month cycle would be nice. A 9 month cycle would be even more interesting, because the dates would not always fall at the same times. --Pat _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
