Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:28:05 -0500 From: "Glen Barber" <glen.j.barber@gmail.com> To: "Maxim Khitrov" <mkhitrov@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Release schedules Message-ID: <4ad871310812121128y18db1c19n8aa45dcc75794739@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <26ddd1750812121113o1590d54r9962ec3d22a20bdb@mail.gmail.com> References: <200811121259.25046.jonathan%2Bfreebsd-questions@hst.org.za> <20081112120147.GA62386@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <f2c294a10812120920l4d11bebfgd5c9208336b075b@mail.gmail.com> <18754.42851.295211.155980@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <4ad871310812121028m4e368da4n69e06d592e312eb0@mail.gmail.com> <26ddd1750812121113o1590d54r9962ec3d22a20bdb@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Maxim Khitrov <mkhitrov@gmail.com> wrote: > > This discussion has come up countless number of times and the answer > is always the same - all of us would rather wait for quality, but we'd > also like some very rough timeline estimates that don't fall back into > the past. Notice that I said nothing about them having to be 100% > accurate. The questions are about the published timelines, the answers > are about the process. Hence, nothing ever gets resolved. It makes no > sense at all to have a published timeline, but claim that it is > irrelevant because "it's done when it's done." Do you not agree? > I agree to a point. I wouldn't push something out if it was less than what could/should be expected. I haven't been a FreeBSD user long enough to remember the (previously quoted) "5.0 debacle", but I'm sure if I waited for a new release only to be disappointed, who knows what OS I may have went with. Yes, keeping users informed on the status of releases is nice -- that's what we have the ML for. > For example, RC2 builds were scheduled for 29 September 2008. When > that day comes (or same week perhaps), whoever has the ability to > change the release schedule page should update it regardless of what > happened. If RC2 builds started, that should be reflected in the > 'actual' column. Otherwise, if it's a minor change in the timeline, > put the new expected date in. As is the case of 7.1 release, if the > person honestly has no idea when RC2 will happen, put in 'December', > 'January', 'Second half of January'... 'Sometime next year' if it's > that uncertain. Anything at all; it takes 5 minutes to do. In the > worst case, your estimate will need to be updated again in a month or > two. In the best case, the release will be made before the expected > date. I, for one, promise not to complain about that. :) > If the sacrifice is an out-of-date column in a webpage while bugs are being worked out, in my opinion, that's fine with me. (IMHO) -- Glen Barber
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4ad871310812121128y18db1c19n8aa45dcc75794739>