Commitment to gnome2 port

[Derek Atkins]

Jon Lapham <lapham at extracta.com.br> writes:

> that is a dead-end technology.  And, I've been dissuaded from doing it
> in gnome2, because my work may not be usable until possibly 2 major
> releases from now (ie: years).  How many others are in the same boat I

I would argue that if we DO go the route of 1.10 AND 2.0 (e.g. two
major releases) it will be because the g2 port is taking MUCH longer
than expected.  If we get the help to finish the port in another 4-6
months then we wont need a 1.10.  However if we do NOT get the help to
complete the port then we'll be _forced_ to issue a 1.10...

Yet even if we release a 1.10, that will NOT delay the 2.0 release...
The 2.0 release will happen when it's finished.  The only question
mark is if we'll need a 1.10, because the g2 port isn't finished and
we NEED to get SQL, Lots, and Periods out there.

So I diagree with your conclusion (even though I do agree with your
premise).

IMHO the developers _ARE_ committed to a g2 port.  But there are other
issues involved in the release cycle to be considered.  If I knew the
g2 port would be finished in another 2 months then I'd agree with you
that we should drop everything -- but I don't see that being the case,
so I'm trying to be pragmatic and leave our options open for a "major"
release between 1.8 and 2.0 in order to get features to our users.

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available