Maybe moving to a pattern like this (peer-review) would also make
sense for us???
Just my 0.02 Euro
Raphael
i think that is essentially what we have. in the end, the release
manager decides. the FWT is just a gatekeeper to make those decisions
manageable.
-w
--
| david "whit" morris
I think those are good points, and I certainly agree with the merits
of having that separation be clear. I just wonder whether we truly
*can* have such a separation, and whether there then is a vacuum in
leadership and policy guidance that we need to fill, because I think
people are expecting
On 5/11/06, Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2006 03:03:17 +0100, Hanno Schlichting
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi again.
>
>> From what I have read so far, we tend into the direction of giving this
> release a bit more time. So here is an updated roadmap proposal. The on
Martin Aspeli wrote:
On Wed, 10 May 2006 20:37:27 +0100, Rocky Burt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hmm... I'll let the date proposals stew in my mind for a little bit...
but just a comment on the SoC projects. My feeling is that we shouldn't
assume *any* SoC project should make it into plone core
Hanno Schlichting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Right, we probably don't need it. I guess I was somehow trying to
> preserve my SoC dates ;)
That in itself isn't a bad idea - we now suddenly have 10 (hopefully) paid
developers doing work for us under the guidance of more (except in the cases of
y
Raphael Ritz wrote:
>
> First, I think we should really encourage the SoC projects by
> defining a time line and process that offers the **possibility**
> of getting results from SoC projects into the 3.0 release.
My intention here was to give all the SoC projects a clear statement
that their cod
Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> Plone 3.0
>> -
>> June 26, plip freeze (no more plip's are accepted)
>
> Do we have such a thing? I mean ... people can write PLIPs whenever they
> want :)
Right, we probably don't need it. I guess I was somehow trying to
preserve my SoC dates ;)
> Do we have any
Raphael Ritz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Of course things are involved as all FWT members are also
> (more or less) active members of the community but let us
> not forget: we are an "open source community" which cannot
> be organized like some corporate body ("you have to do this until
> then")
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
[..]
Plone 3.0
-
June 26, plip freeze (no more plip's are accepted)
August 21, proposal freeze (review bundles must be ready)
September 25, feature freeze (all features have been merged)
October 22, first beta release
December 18, first release candidate
January
On Thu, 11 May 2006 08:06:30 +0100, Rob Miller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
it's okay.. i've cooled off. i'm sorry for flying off the handle.
To be honest, re-reading my post, I completely understand how it would be
taken that way.
Whether it's wearing the framework team hat or not at any
On Thu, 11 May 2006 03:03:17 +0100, Hanno Schlichting
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi again.
From what I have read so far, we tend into the direction of giving this
release a bit more time. So here is an updated roadmap proposal. The one
thing it tries to be is realistic about the dates if we
Martin Aspeli wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2006 01:21:21 +0100, Rob Miller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
whoa, hold on just a minute here. NOBODY, until you, right now, has
ever said
that this is within the scope of the framework team. the framework team
exists for one reason, and that is to vet the
Hi again.
>From what I have read so far, we tend into the direction of giving this
release a bit more time. So here is an updated roadmap proposal. The one
thing it tries to be is realistic about the dates if we allow more time
for development of new features and therefore bugs as well and get the
On Wed, 10 May 2006 20:37:27 +0100, Rocky Burt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hmm... I'll let the date proposals stew in my mind for a little bit...
but just a comment on the SoC projects. My feeling is that we shouldn't
assume *any* SoC project should make it into plone core for 3.0. The
realit
On 5/10/06, whit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
/me dons grumpy old former FWT member hat
remember, all that SoC stuff has to have bundles and be approved by you
guys. No implementing proposals after the fact. That's about the only
standing rule for this team. So if you are looking at this sort of
/me dons grumpy old former FWT member hat
remember, all that SoC stuff has to have bundles and be approved by you
guys. No implementing proposals after the fact. That's about the only
standing rule for this team. So if you are looking at this sort of
schedule, likely almost none of the SoC s
On Wed, 2006-10-05 at 20:58 +0200, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Plone 2.5
> -
> May 2006, announced release
> June 2006, expected release
>
> CMF
> ---
> April 2006, 2.0
> July 2006, 2.1 (planned)
>
> Zope
>
> May 2006, 2.9.3
> June 2006, 2.10
> November 2006, 2.11
> May 2007, 2.12
>
17 matches
Mail list logo
