On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:

Planning is also important.

Time is good, but another thing is i think we should think about,
what features we want to be in new release, and do not release until
they delivered.

I don't really like this. I prefer rhythm, agility. Timeboxing enables maximum value in each release. If a feature is really important, it will be on time. If not on time, it means it was no so important.��

Always green test is a must-have.

��

Besides bug fixing and minor improvements, there should be some
functionality which we want to have in new release,

That should be a goal, but don't delay a release because the feature is not here. If releases are often ( for example every 3 months), shorter, it won't be a big problem to wait for the next one.

I prefer to have a release *now* without my feature and wait 3 months for the next release than no release and waiting for 3 months more with less and less energy.

Laurent.

��

so then you could say: 1.x is better than previous because of A,B,C,
but not because a,b,c ��( capital letters is major stuff, while regular
ones is for minor stuff ) :)

On 6 April 2011 10:01, Serge Stinckwich <serge.stinckwich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:56 PM, laurent laffont
> <laurent.laffont@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck
>> <marianopeck@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes!!! totally agree.�� Now that we release 1.2, I would freeze and release
>>> PharoCore 1.3 beta.�� Update the link to stable pharo to that, and start
>>> trying to load the dev tools there.
>>
>> +10
>> And propose a fixed date for release - no compromise, will be release at
>> this date.
>
> +1
> Timeboxing sounds great.
> Podomoro for software development ;-)
>
> Regards,
> --
> Serge Stinckwich
> UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC), Hanoi, Vietnam
> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk
> http://doesnotunderstand.org/
>
>

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.