once the 4.2 schedule decision is worked out, i think it would be really good to sit back and ask some questions. this may simply re-affirm what we are doing, or it may indicate need for changes. either way, having a conscious awareness of how we are doing is undeniably better than simply making it up as we go along.
some questions i'd suggest asking ourselves (please add your own as well): * what has the 6 month cycle won us in terms of real benefit thus far? * are we getting the return in commitment promised from third parties due to the discipline of a 6 month cycle, or do we need to re-assess that with them? * how long before we can disentable the development cycle from it, ala Dirk and Sebastian's presentation at Akademy '08? * if that disentanglement will take more than a year, how do we deal with aligning our development with Qt? (our most critical and quickly evolving component) * under what circumstances should we allow ourselves to alter the plan for the cycle we are currently in at the time? * how do we define "useful predictability"? is it knowing that the goal in N cycles from now will be 6 months, or is it more important to know with certainty what the next 2-3 releases will actually be? * are application developers being well served by the amount and form of communication thus far? * are the libraries being well served by the amount and form of communication thus far? overall, i think the release team is doing a very good job. the above questions are not an indictment or a measure of distrust in the process. they are, rather, out of respect for what is working and a desire to see this team remain a healthy and well-oiled machine. -- Aaron J. Seigo humru othro a kohnu se GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 KDE core developer sponsored by Trolltech
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ release-team mailing list release-team@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team