I've been thinking more about the previous conversation about stable releases and coordinating work.
David seemed unhappy with the idea of a stable release happening once we got to zero critical issues. My interpretation of his comments was that, while zero critical issues may be a necessary condition for a stable release, it is not a sufficient condition. Instead of having a stable release be a byproduct, it should be planned for, and development adjusted to make it happen. While GOP 9 said that we will treat all contributors as volunteers, and not assign tasks, I don't think that precludes us from working together. Somebody who identifies a strong vision can certainly rally volunteers to the cause. So, with this idea in mind, I'd like to kick off a discussion about the next stable release. Assuming that we can fix all the critical issues (I think that's possible, but may be a month out or so), what else should we plan to have part of the next stable? Is there something being worked on and almost there such that we should wait for a stable release until it's implemented? Is there something that's so poorly implemented it should be eliminated from a stable release? I'm open to hearing everybody's opinion. If we can get consensus it might be a powerful motivation for moving to 2.16. Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
