[Squeakfoundation]3.6 release timing (was Re: Shrinking alpha image)

[goran.hultgren at bluefish.se]

Howdy!

Doug Way <dway at riskmetrics.com> wrote: 
> goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:
> > (crossposting, well - it seemed good)
> 
> (Yeah, occasional crossposting is probably unavoidable.  Perhaps we should
> only crosspost when we want to shift discussion from squeak-dev over to the
> SqF list (and maybe vice versa).  Then all follow-ups should only be posted to
> the newly added list, as I'm doing here.  For example, squeak-dev can still be
> a place where planning-related discussions will often happen (since it's a
> free-for-all), but in more of a brainstorming phase, and to get as much input
> as possible from the community.  But then when final decisions need to be
> made, the discussions should happen here on the SqF list.)

Sounds like a reasonable plan.

> > As I see it the plan Doug has laid out seems fine. I mean, we aren't
> > really maintaining two images - we are maintaining the smaller one and
> > making sure that the "full script" works.
> > 
> > BUT... may I suggest that we set up a goal for 3.6 that SM1.1 is reached
> > before release? Otherwise this "full script" will have problems, since
> > it can't refer to specific versions of packages.
> 
> Sounds like a good idea.  I was guessing that SM1.1 would be out relatively
> soon (within 1-2 months?)  Making it a requirement for 3.6 could give you an
> extra incentive. ;-)

Exactly. :-)

> > And btw, who of us guides should be in charge of making sure that we pin
> > down the list of planned things for 3.6? I have seen numerous posts on
> > this subject but someone needs to collect these into a "big list" that
> > we can condense somewhere and come up with "The Grand 3.6 Plan". In
> > short - who should be the "Release Boss" for 3.6? :-)
> > 
> > And the gist of that plan should of course be summarized on this page:
> > http://swiki.squeakfoundation.org/squeakfoundation/79
> > 
> > Daniel? Tim? Ned? Craig?
> > 
> > Personally I would like to keep my focus at you-know-what and Doug has
> > already taken on enough IMHO.
> 
> Right.  Although I am sort of the "Release Master" or "Implementor", meaning
> the guy in charge of moving the release from alpha->beta->gamma->final, and
> making sure it happens reasonably on schedule.  But yeah, someone else should
> probably be in charge of pinning down the release "content".
> 
> > I think Daniel would make a greate Release Boss... :-)
> 
> I might nominate Daniel also, partly because he's posted on the topic in the
> past, and his current role as guide of "image detanglement" is somewhat
> nebulous and is partly covered by Ned's and Craig's roles anyway.  But if he
> doesn't want to do it and someone else does, that would be fine, too.

Yes. I don't care who does it, just as long as someone makes an
inventory and selects the stuff that we should aim for.

> On a related note:  As the release implementor (or scheduler or whatever the
> best term is), I'd like us to come to a decision on when we want to release
> 3.6.
[SNIP of good arguments on cycle that I agree with]

> And having releases every 4 months would make the tri-annual releases, which
> brings up the "triad" again. :-)  Anyway, I could be convinced to go slower
> than this, but I don't think I'd want to go any faster. 
> 
> If we stick with the "First Fridays" release date, that would put the release
> date of 3.6 on August 1st.

Sounds dandy. And just to make it clear - I agree with the idea of
focusing on time before content.

> We can then come up with a list of content that we think can reasonably get
> done in that time.
> 
> Thoughts on this?

Nope, not really - I like it.

> - Doug Way
> 
> 
> p.s. Even before we decide on the content for 3.6, I think we could get
> started on harvesting fixes for 3.6 right away.  I'll send out another note
> shortly about this... getting the harvesting rules nailed down so I know what
> to do.

Right.

regards, Göran