[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-promo
Subject:    Re: [kde-promo] suggestions for next release process:
From:       Tom Chance <tom () acrewoods ! net>
Date:       2006-06-02 9:52:53
Message-ID: 200606021052.53307.tom () acrewoods ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

Ahoy,

On Thursday 01 June 2006 19:35, Danil Dotsenko wrote:
> Thursday 01 June 2006 10:57 Tom Chance wrote:
> > On Thursday 01 June 2006 18:36, Danil Dotsenko wrote:
> > > 2 month warning is pretty much useless as a warning. No fixed bugs yet,
> > > no idea what the freshly baked release is all about. We need to figure
> > > out how to have a 7-5 day warning of already assured release.
> > 
> > To be fair there was ample warning and enough people on this list knew
> > about the date or at least where to find it, Carsten Niehaus prepared a
> > changelog well in advance and we even discussed the key messages with a
> > week or so to go. Yet Sebas was left pleading for somebody to finish
> > stuff with little or no response until it was too late.
> 
> Is my English really that bad? Again, 3.5.3 release job was a rush job for
> 2 reasons:
> 1. People who KNEW what the actual release date is were very busy and could
> not help much. (end of May - exams, work, all hell brakes loose)
> 2. Situation No1 left the job of release notes on those who had some time
> (ppl like me) but have no clue against what deadline I am working.

Righto, so if I coordinate the promotion of 3.5.4 I'll make sure I post a 
2-week and if necessary a 1-week warning for those of you who don't want to 
jot publicly-available dates down in your diary.

For those with diaries KDE 3.5.4 is due on the 24th of July:
http://developer.kde.org/development-versions/kde-3.5-release-plan.html


> Tom, with all the respect, but judging by the last rush job, you alone are
> hardly the "best" person to judge if the release is worded correctly. Too
> much computereese. Too many incomplete sentences. I highly suggest peer
> review of at least 3-4 pairs of diverse eyes and a "weighted vote" sorta
> rough arrangement or understanding.
> 
> Relying on one person, whose personal life is unreliable is completely
> unreliable. If you arrange for a system with a good safety net, we don't
> have to rely on you any more. You can sleep much more and better.

Heh, lovely :) The draft wasn't great but I wanted to get something better 
than the one floating around out. If 3-4 people can collaborate that sounds 
ideal. I'd prefer consensus to a vote though - unless somebody vetos with a 
strong reason we just look for a "yes, that's OK" from a few nominated people 
who we trust... ... ?

Would you like to coordinate things, Danil, or would you prefer to take a back 
seat and peer review work posted to the list?

Regards,
Tom



-- 
I'll give £100 to People & Planet if 20 people give £10.
Help me help this amazing student activist network!
http://www.pledgebank.com/help-pnp
 
_______________________________________________
This message is from the kde-promo mailing list.

Visit https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on \
or temporarily stop your subscription.


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]