[Squeakfoundation]Shepherding large enhancements

[diegogomezdeck at consultar.com]

I'm going to shout also... Seems like an acepted way.

>>> I'm against having a release on Friday.
>>>
>>> Just look at the BugfixArchive: There's a lot of stuff pending,
>>> which really needs to be included. And my feeling is, that there's
>>> just not enough "new" stuff in 3.6 to allow a new release: Like 3.5,
>>> we'd get a "new release" nobody would use.
>>
>> Agree as I mention in one of my early emails.
>> 3.6 should be sexy in terms of new stuff/clean/improvements.
>> Let us make it really sexy.
>
> Hmmm. And then people - WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY THIS WHEN THE 3.6 PLAN WAS
> POSTED???

IIRC, There was a (big?) group of people saying that since the very
beginning.

> He, I couldn't help myself, sorry for the shouting. ;-) But I really
> mean it. We agreed on the plan. And one of the things we wanted to do
> is to have faster release cycles than before - we are aiming for 3
> releases per year IIRC.

We are not talking about the plan. We're talking WHAT to do in the case
(like now) that the plan CAN'T be respected.

We had choosed Date and Features (an error in itself).  Some of us want to
respect the date, other (including me) want to respect the Features.

> There will ALWAYS be stuff to harvest. There will ALWAYS be cool new
> stuff to add. But we need a proper beta and gamma period.

What is more important? the "proper periods" or the results?

> Personally I think we should stick to the plan but move the beta start
> a few days so that NewLook, TTF and Simulatorfixes can get in.
>
> IMHO SM1.1 can wait until early 3.7. Even if it breaks my heart to
> admit it. :-)

Every time we talked about what to include in tha image the anser
was: "Ehhh... wait... the configuration maps are coming".

IMO, the SM1.1 is a MUST to avoid a fork in the community.

> regards, Göran

Diego.

PS: Oops... I REALIZED I DIDN'T SHOUT!