|
From: Christoph W. <chr...@we...> - 2004-06-01 23:31:57
|
ci...@gm... wrote: > I think when we fix the registered bugs, we are ready to release a > development version (aka ALPHA). I would suggest version 2.0.0-ALPHA.=20 >=20 > How far is bug #932581? Do we need some DB-improvement for > this one? It is marked with quite high priority. Bug 932581 is now with our current model "quite easy" to implement (we = have the need to wrap an RssGroupNode into some Channel interface) but will = hav a great impact on performance. I'd vote for a bug fix in a later beta (performance optimized) version. >> Should we schedule a release date? I'm afraid if we don't establish >> some deadline we'll release in 2005 ;) >=20 > Deadlines are good. Do you want to make a suggestion? 07.06. Without bug fix for 932581 11.06. With bug 932581 fixed > My plan is to improve the DB-access right after the alpha release and > make the SQL-backend completely optional and non-default. I am really > a fan of light-weight applications, because my desktop must be fluent > and fast. Of course, I'm aware that we will introduce some > complications, because our channel management (subscriptions) is > still partially SQL based. =20 I see complications of course - but I also see the need for lightweight simple solutions - you have my vote! I'm sure that we will be able to implement some backend (or even the /dev/null backend) in reasonable = time! You have my support! > When we solve this issue we are ready for a beta. The release can > follow quickly.=20 Yes! Cheers Christoph |