Hi, * >Daniel Carrera wrote: >> You have your reasons. But given this situation, is it surprising >> that volunteers don't contribute? People like to see their work >> being reviewed and accepted. They contribute something small, they >> see it goes well, so they contribute a little more. Give it time, >> and you have a new developer. If I have to wait 18 months to see my >> first contribution make it to the first release, I'm not going to >> contribute. I'll go to Ximian instead. >> >> They only FOSS project that can get away with huge release cycles is >> Debian. :-) And Debian still has a "testing" and "unstable" branch >> for those who are less patient. > >looking at the recent tension between Debian and Ubuntu I would think >not even Debian can get away with huge release cycles (mostly in the >case of desktop users) > >another example of people feed-up with long release cycles: downloads >for our beta/devel builds have exceeded the downloads for stable >builds, this is because people are hungry for new features > Hm. Not really sure where to go with your post, Nicu, you phrase it so tendentiously. We have done an excellent job of, for starters, advertising 2.0beta and deprecating 1.1.4. We want people to use 2.0beta, for we want people to test it and tell us where it breaks, so that we can make it that much better. 2.0 is the future and it's pretty close. In contrast, we are not encouraging people to use the stable build. To then imply that it is a kind of failure that we are succeeding is... bizarre.
Once 2.0 is final, there will still be a developer build. I doubt very much--history is my guide--that the developer build will prove more popular than the stable build, even if we revert, as we very well might, to advertising it on the homepage. Cheers, Louis --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
