On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 11:23 +0200, Will Stephenson wrote:
So I'd like to start the discussion now before we lose a month waiting to discuss it at osc12, where only a fraction of the active members of the project are is going to be present anyway. You don't want everything to be decided by German Engineers* for you do you?
Some ideas to start the ball rolling:
I generally think getting us back into the established 8-month cycle is a good thing, even at the expense of 12.3 being shortened. We defined .1 .2 and .3 as being November, July, March. I do see the long-term support advocates screaming bloody murder that this would in effect shorten the support lifecycle of 12.2. But I guess that's really another matter to discuss. However, my feeling is this: I don't think it is entirely clear to everyone, except those most closest to the development process, exactly what was the reason (or where things went wrong) for the 12.2 delay. A lot of marketing-spin that the delay was the product of our own success as a growing community. A scheduling discussion is good, but equally as important is a discussion centering on the lessons learned and how we can build new pathways for the community to step up and contribute. There's a lot of people who would like to move from armchair quarterbacking to actual field play but discussions are generally so convoluted and vague, it may be intimidating to them to actually take the next step into technical contribution. Bryen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org