From: Donald G P. <don...@ni...> - 2010-03-17 13:46:21
|
Donal K. Fellows wrote: > For these things, it's probably better if, instead of making any > specific commitment to have them in 8.6b2 or not, we instead set a > strict timebox on how long we'll wait. The snag for me is that for any new feature, I think it ought to appear in a beta release before 8.6.0 . So if the set of features still desired is not going to be in b2, yet they are still coming to get into 8.6 somehow, then there must be a b3 release and likely will need to be a b4 release. In that scenario, getting 8.6b2 out the door doesn't do a whole lot to accelerate the release of .0. Only getting the features done, or abandoning them will do that. Yes, b2 should go out ASAP for other important reasons (notably delivering the fixes and features already in it), and has been far too long delayed, but the reasoning above explains why "don't release yet" has been such an attractive local minimum. -- | Don Porter Mathematical and Computational Sciences Division | | don...@ni... Information Technology Laboratory | | http://math.nist.gov/~DPorter/ NIST | |______________________________________________________________________| |