On Wednesday 25 July 2001 12:16 am, Simon Hausmann wrote:
> Does this schedule mean that the planned-features document for 2.3
> (http://developer.kde.org/development-versions/kde-2.3-features.html) is
> postponed for KDE 3.1?

No, I think we should just make a general "KDE TODO list" and see how much of 
that _should_ go into 3.0 and the rest of it _can_ go into 3.0 as time 
permits.

> In other words: Do we want the changes in KDE 3.0 to be solely porting
> changes, bugfixes and minor feature additions, or do we want KDE 3.0
> to also include new major features (which could possibly delay the 3.0
> release, like we experienced with 2.2) ?

I don't think we should _aim_ for any major new features, but I don't think 
we should prevent anything either. We will for sure have delays with 3.0, 
just like we have with 2.2. Please note that the 2.2 delays are hardly due to 
"major new features" but much more due to "basic stuff not working".

> On the other hand it requires a lot of discipline, and we don't want to
> draw off developers from the CVS just because we perform a feature freeze
> for a few months.

I don't think we should have feature freezes longer than strictly necasssery. 
We can have unrestricted development till we have reached our goals for 3.0 
(the things that _should_ go in) and then we feature freeze for as long as it 
takes to get things stable. I think 2 months and 2 months are realistic 
durations for these two periods, but time will tell.

Since not everyone will be tied up with "things that _should_ be done for 
3.0" those people can freely work on whatever they want. 

Cheers,
Waldo
-- 
Andrei Sakharov, Exiled 1980-1986, USSR, http://www.aip.org/history/sakharov/
Dmitry Sklyarov, Detained 2001-????, USA, http://www.elcomsoft.com/