On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Eric Evans <eev...@acunu.com> wrote: > I'm not opposed, but I'd rather see us try a longer release cycle > before introducing too much rigor here.
I had hoped that my suggestion above would not be felt as being rigorous :(. At least that was not the intention. But to be clear, I don't want us to get too rigorous either. However, and as much as I'm all for "let's all be smart", the project is growing, we have more committers and we may get hopefully even more in the future, and I think it's unrealistic to expect everyone to be on the same page through some kind of magical mental communication. Basically I don't want to impose rigor, I want to add some form of schedule (on which we can all agree on) so that the project does goes into the direction we all want to. Basically I think it's more easy (and more sane) to agree a priori at least on the big picture, than to have to react when you're not happy with how this go. It's more open too. But anyway, all I really want is for us developer to have 2 dates in mind: "hum, I have to do that big issue before X if I want it in version Y" and then "hum, I have to fix that small problem without waiting to be 2 days before the release date because we need it in". And I think it's just easier if those dates are fixed in advance. We could get even more fancy and write feature roadmap and whatnot, but that was not even part of my suggestion and I think it would be harder to do. -- Sylvain
