Amos Jeffries wrote:
> We don't exactly date things here. With everyone working on voluntary
> time its unpredictable. Though there has been a fairly regular 4-week
> cycle for new X.Y.0.z beta releases.
> 
> For planning and upgrade testing, 3.1.0.6 is a fairly stable point to
> begins with.
> 
> Back before we/I decided to adopt the fluid feature inclusion we had a
> set of approved features for 3.1. The last of these given a guarantee of
> being in 3.1 is still grinding it's way through testing (far too
> slowly). I expect that will take us through March and maybe April before
> 3.1 gets a chance of even starting the stable waiting period.
> 
> There is also a short list of RC bugs which we consider major enough to
> need fixing before we call it stable.
> Many of these bugs are only confirmed to exist in 3.0. But they are
> serious enough that we really NEED someone who can see them in 3.0 to
> test 3.1 and confirm they are not still hiding.
> 
> Last time I had to guesstimate a timeline I said mid-year (june/july)
> 2009, I've seen no reason to change it for better or worse yet.
> 
> Amos

Thank you for your answer Amos. This is exactly what i wanted to know.

-- Matthias

Reply via email to