On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 15:22:50 -0700, Jamey Sharp <ja...@minilop.net> wrote:
> Three months does feel like a > long time to stall development on master, though, given how > attention-starved this code already is. I'd prefer a three-month total > release cycle, assuming a willing release manager. Note that 1.9 is currently scheduled to come out in mid August, so we've only got two months to go, but still, it does seem like a bit of delay. Running a shorter release schedule would be fine with me, but as we don't have any significant work happening in other trees, several people have suggested that we'd get into a permanent 'release freeze' mode with very limited space in the schedule for developing, testing and integrating new work. > Perhaps we need an xserver-next tree I know I don't have the bandwidth to manage this as well as the 1.9 server release, perhaps someone else would? If not, I wonder if we couldn't have either a separate tree or just a separate branch where people were pushing these kinds of changes by themselves, at least they'd be all ready to merge once 1.9 ships. -- keith.pack...@intel.com
pgpQ6cE6chm6d.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
