Re: Freezing for 2.18

[address@hidden]

On 10 mars 2013, at 22:30, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:

> Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>>> So, to resume, I agree that a freeze is important.  When the freeze
>>> kicks in, I'd rather that we say something like "no new big projects
>>> starting on date X will be part of 2.18" so that developers can plan
>>> out their next few months accordingly.
>> 
>> +1
> 
> Actually, "no projects without a serious chance to get finished and
> debugged until date X" is a more important metric.  Take a look at the
> "full" \relative proposal: it is a biggy touching several thousands of
> lines.  But consequences are clear to estimate and shake out, so the
> decision to do this kind of big thing can be done quite late in the
> game.  Because the fallout is quite clear and limited.
> 
> The starting date is much less important than a realistic view of the
> wrapup date.
> 


I think it is important for everyone in the community of developers to tie off 
things that they feel to be important before putting out a stable release.  We 
should feel out where everyone is with their work, life plans and when/where a 
gel in adding things could fit into these things.  If LilyPond were a piece of 
commercial software I could understand one person imposing a limit, but as it 
is a team of peers working together, I think that everyone should set a limit 
that makes sense for them, announce it, and stick to it.  This may push a 
stable release date back some, but I'd rather there be a later stable release 
that every volunteer developer feels good about than an earlier one.

Cheers,
MS