In a message written on Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 12:24:44PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Why would the 240/4 updates blow the schedule? > > More code, more regression testing, same number of programmers. Do the math.
Less code, every patch produced to date /removes/ code. More regression testing, same number of programmes, ok. > Take it as a given that it *will* slip the schedule some amount, because > the resources for a 240/4 feature will have to come from somewhere. So > how much slippage are you willing to accept? Ok, I'll accept a month slippage in IPv6 "features". (What are we still waiting on, anyway?) I also believe that's also about 29 more days than most vendors should need to do the job. -- Leo Bicknell - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ Read TMBG List - [EMAIL PROTECTED], www.tmbg.org
pgpnYJqL0oCGc.pgp
Description: PGP signature