Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Right. For the record, when I said I would work on "trunk" I never
committed myself to an exact date.
Everything within the time range 2.3.0 + 6 months is unreastic. Let's
not hurry.
I'm really sorry to hear this: I hoped "my" vote was clear about this
Here is what you replied:
-----
> About the "next-minor" release as described above:
[+0] Indifferent (+0 and -0 are welcome to understand the feelings)
> About the "next-major" release as described above:
[+1] I will work on that release
------
The vote also made it clear this differences beteen next-major and
next-greater:
"next-major":
- based on current trunk
- storage and config.xml compatible with 2.3.0
- ETA: branch on Dec 2006/Jan 2007, release on Mar 2007
"next-greater":
- based on current trunk
- not backward compatible
- ETA: not planned.
And it also included this sentence:
"Please vote +1 only if you are willing to put concrete efforts on the
release. "
Having a result with an unanimous +1 for next-major made me think we
have 6 active committers for next-major trying to achieve the ETA
described (Mar 2007 for next-major final)
I understand from this message that you instead are +0 on next-major
(with the additional doubts about feasibility) and +1 on working on
next-greater. I hope the other voters understood better the vote and
they don't think that Mar 2007 for next-major is unrealistic, otherwise
we have a problem in our voting process.
If this was not clear in the vote I invite you and any other committer
in the same shoes to resurrect that voting thread and cast new votes,
because otherwise here we have people working on roadmaps that have a
"false" consensus.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
