Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:59:33 -0500 From: Jim Bryant <kc5vdj@yahoo.com> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up! Message-ID: <3B8ADEE5.6020903@yahoo.com> References: <3B89DF04.F6A250F9@elischer.org> <66544.998934042@critter> <20010827133112.B79584@rand.tgd.net> <3B8AB039.7090705@yahoo.com> <20010827134902.A80313@rand.tgd.net> <p05101007b7b06cd773ba@[128.113.24.47]> <3B8AC358.3020303@yahoo.com> <p0510100ab7b07bd6f778@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 5:02 PM -0500 8/27/01, Jim Bryant wrote: > >> Garance A Drosihn wrote: >> >>> We can't just keep pushing back the release date because "some >>> very important enhancements" could be made. It will ALWAYS be >>> true that there are more "very important enhancements" on >>> the horizon, and you can't keep running after those. You have >>> to pick some point, and stick to that point, and "ship" at that >>> point. As long as current is known to be in rapid flux, most >> >> >> I'm glad you support integration of KSE then... As I recall such >> threading was in the original design specs for 5.0, as released >> when work on 5.0 began. > > > I'm disappointed that you completely misunderstood what I intended > to say in the above. My point is that sometimes you have to stick > to a "ship date" because you have to stick to that date, and not > because you stick to some list of features that you'd like to see. > The longer you let ship-dates slip, the longer you end up without > a release-quality product. I to this day still think that was the reasoning behind the Thanksgiving [An American Holiday] release of 2.0-R. What a disaster! I know for a fact that MickeySoft has had this philosophy since at least Win-95.. What a disaster! Marketing people screaming about ship-dates are the prime cause of unstable software, IMHO. Software should be shipped when design goals are met, not before. Last I heard, 4.4-R is RSN... Why should there be a mad rush to release 5.0-R practically right after 4.4-R, especially if it's not yet ready for prime-time? At the rate things are going, even WITH KSE integrated, 5.0-R should be close to the currently projected release date. I forget... Wasn't the *ORIGINAL* release date for 5.0-R slated for early-2002? What happened to that? Marketing types step in? > I think a lot of good work has gone into the current cut at KSE > support, and I certainly hope it goes in. However, there are a > number of other factors to consider. The right way to get KSE in > 5.0 is to help do the work which is necessary for that to happen, > and not to deliberately misquote people -- as you are pretty > clearly doing in the above. What I explicitly said in the above > message (and which you explicitly deleted) was that KSE should > wait for a later release if the remaining work is not done. If > you have some other opinion, that is fine, but do not reword *my* > opinion to claim that I agree completely with your opinion. It was an asinine reply to an asinine comment, not a deliberate misquotation. > Julian did a lot of good work, all he needs is a few more > developers to help test that work. None of us need a thread > arguing about release dates vs some goals set two years ago. Somehow I see the GOP using that same argument next year concerning the tax-scam... Medicare surplus wiped out, 9 billion into Social Security starting next week... oops, off topic... I agree with you to a point there. The design goals should be met. This isn't a commercial product, and thus I don't see that the argument that the release date should be set in stone is relevant, although it should be close to that which was originally specified. > I "support" the integration of KSE in the sense that I intend to > help test it (on a dual-CPU i386) sometime in the next week. I > do not support a delay of "5.0". I can not test on Alpha, as I > have no Alpha machines. Anyone who wants to prove their support > for KSE in 5.0 should step up and offer to do some of the testing, > etc. Actions will speak louder than any (misquoted) words. Again, I agree, except I still don't understand your dire need for a mad rush to have another "Thanksgiving release" a la 2.0-R. FreeBSD releases should be goal-oriented, not marketing-type oriented. 2.0-R left FreeBSD with reputation damage that took several years to clear up, I would have thought that some had learned from that "stick to the release date" experience. My first experience with -current sprang from that experience [for a while -current was more stable than -RELEASE, on freaking production systems]. It didn't take too long to get -RELEASE stable though, as I recall. Marketing types have a place: Selling RELEASED software and hardware... They should not be the end-all word on ship dates though. Hell, the Pentium 4 was a nice concept until... jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B8ADEE5.6020903>