On 10 mars 2013, at 22:30, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> writes: > >>> So, to resume, I agree that a freeze is important. When the freeze >>> kicks in, I'd rather that we say something like "no new big projects >>> starting on date X will be part of 2.18" so that developers can plan >>> out their next few months accordingly. >> >> +1 > > Actually, "no projects without a serious chance to get finished and > debugged until date X" is a more important metric. Take a look at the > "full" \relative proposal: it is a biggy touching several thousands of > lines. But consequences are clear to estimate and shake out, so the > decision to do this kind of big thing can be done quite late in the > game. Because the fallout is quite clear and limited. > > The starting date is much less important than a realistic view of the > wrapup date. >
I think it is important for everyone in the community of developers to tie off things that they feel to be important before putting out a stable release. We should feel out where everyone is with their work, life plans and when/where a gel in adding things could fit into these things. If LilyPond were a piece of commercial software I could understand one person imposing a limit, but as it is a team of peers working together, I think that everyone should set a limit that makes sense for them, announce it, and stick to it. This may push a stable release date back some, but I'd rather there be a later stable release that every volunteer developer feels good about than an earlier one. Cheers, MS _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
