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 pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
