From: Youness A. <kak...@ka...> - 2011-11-06 00:55:50
|
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 2:17 PM, David Seikel <on...@gm...> wrote: > On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 13:46:16 -0400 Youness Alaoui > <kak...@ka...> wrote: > > > On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Seikel <on...@gm...> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > And as I've been told numerous times "a release is free".. what > > > > is it that you lose when you do a release, what's so important > > > > and critical about having a release ? > > > > > > API lock in. Configuration file compatibility lock in. These > > > things are important if you actually like your users. Lock in is > > > not free, it removes freedom. > > > > > Euhh, no, for sure a major version bump is not free, but a cyclic > > release that doesn't break API/ABI or anything else, that's free, and > > that's what I was referring to. > > First release, and this is what we are talking about for E17, is the one > where you get locked in. > Cyclic releases are for after the first release of E17, so at that point, the API would have already been locked. > > > > > > i consider them a deal breaker :( a right now i want to not talk > > > > > dates until > > > > > AFTER efl 1.1. those dates will depend on if that gets a delay > > > > > in it or what > > > > > people do manage to do between now and then with e17. if that > > > > > todo list still > > > > > is no further along, then the timeframe has to be longer, if it > > > > > is, then shorter. > > > > > > > > > Alright, *that* in my opinion is an actual compromise of the > > > > subject discussed here (well, on the point I am making). No > > > > problems, we can talk dates after efl 1.1, I am fine with that :) > > > > > > It's what was being said all along, by a few of us. Not a > > > compromise at all, just the plan. There was no need to make a big > > > drama about stuff to get to this point. lol > > > > > Well, if that was the plan, it was never said (to me anyways), this > > is the first time it was said in this whole thread. > > Umm.. > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Carsten Haitzler > <ra...@ra...>wrote: > > if people WANT A RELEASE, THEN STEPUP AND DO SOMETHING! > > > > with those done then we can absolutely do an alpha (though it must > > wait until after efl 1.1 which is now due in about 3 weeks). > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 4:42 AM, David Seikel <on...@gm...> > wrote: > > The consensus does seem to be that there wont be an e17 release until > > after the EFL 1.1 release anyway. The amount of passion and time we > > are spending arguing over the exact timing of that e17 release could > > be better spent actually working on that e17 TODO and the EFL release. > > > > How about we work on it, then see how much e17 TODO is left after the > > EFL 1.1 release. That will be a better time to argue you case, when > > it wont distract people from the work that needs to be done. Perhaps > > by then it will be moot, and the TODO is completed. > > On Sunday, October 30, 2011, Carsten Haitzler <ra...@ra...> > wrote: > > i'm working on the todo and efl 1.1 after efl 1.1 its e17 and elm > > 1.0. e17 involves working on the tasks assigned. > > > It's a very long thread, there are probably other mentions. You even > quoted some of these yourself. You must have read them. B-) > Well, all those mentions are about "e17 release after efl 1.1", yeah, that's fine, what I found interesting and considered a compromise in raster's mail was "we can talk about dates after efl 1.1".. in other words, it's not just "release after 1.1", or "we stick to the todo and never set any dates" but rather "we can discuss it later". > > -- > A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants > coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > RSA(R) Conference 2012 > Save $700 by Nov 18 > Register now > http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enl...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > |