> On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:58 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote: >> > >> > 1) "Prime candidates": Documented features that have at least one >> > developer or sponsor behind them, ready to commit time to fully >> develop >> > (i.e., write, test, document, commit, and provide initial support) the >> > proposed feature within v3.1 release timeline. >> > >> > 2) "Wish List": Other features somebody wants to see implemented. It >> > would still be nice to have a "shepherd" for each feature. Features >> from >> > this group can be propagated to the Prime set once they gain a little >> > bit of documentation and a dedicated developer. > >> > Finally, how about setting a deadline for v3.1 feature-freeze? How >> about >> > January 31st, 2008? > >> Seems to me we don't have enough info for this one. And won't really >> until >> 2.x is closed and the user base start yelling for certain features >> before >> they upgrade. > > IMO, we need an initial set of Prime Candidates (with explanations, > commitments, time estimates, etc. and not just the current one-liners) > before we should finalize the v3.1 feature freeze date. The set of > features-to-be-implemented and their completion estimates determines > when v3.1 should be ready to be frozen, does not it? > > I do not see any connection with v2.x though. If we implement three new > features and want to release v3.1 with them, why should we wait for > something happening with v2.x or its users? >
The connection is that we want people to actually use 3.x. Giving them strong reasons not to is a Bad Idea. Missing features is a pretty strong reason for not choosing software at times. Amos