Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > So, what should we do? Should we go another month or two and just wait > > until we have enough must-have features? While not waiting on specific > > features, it _is_ waiting for something to warrant a release. I guess > > the big question is whether we release on a scheduled-basis or a > > enough-features-basis. > > Schedualed basis ... if we released on an 'enough features basis', I could > see alot longer then 6 mos between releases happening very quickly ... we > have enough problems staying within the scheduale as it is, let alot > moving it to a 'sliding scale' ...
I guess the big question is that if we can't get enough big features in 6 months, do we still stay on the 6 month schedule? I know Tom said folks don't have to upgrade --- that is true, but our releases do seem a little lighter lately. Six months would be June 1 beta, so maybe that is still a good target. I agree we should not hold up beta for any feature. So maybe the plan is June 1 beta, and we don't care if we have enough big features or not --- does that sound good to everyone? Or should we be looking at May 1 as Tom originally suggested? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
