Roadmap proposal for 3.10/4.0
ramonleon at cox.net
Sun Oct 15 21:23:29 UTC 2006
Andreas Raab wrote:
> I don't know what other people think, but these long feature lists just
> give me the shivers. What if instead of listing feature X, Y, and Z (on
> many of which the implementation hasn't even started) we simply have a
> schedule that says:
> a) Open discussion: Two months of determining what's ready to go into
> the next release. At the end of the that period there should be a list
> of things that we'd like to have in the next release.
> b) Alpha phase: Two months of "getting stuff in" for those things that
> we agreed upon in the first phase. At the end of this phase, any new
> feature that isn't in yet, won't get in.
> c) Beta phase: Two months of testing, fixing bugs updating the docs and
> packages at Squeakmap. At the end of which we have a new release.
> Six months, and it should be done. With clear deadlines what is expected
> to happen when. With proposals made by the people who have done the work
> already. With work that is already finished and only needs inclusion
> instead of stuff on which work hasn't even begun yet.
> - Andreas
More information about the Squeak-dev