On 01/23/2013 11:59 AM, James Freer wrote:
Why not consider an
annual release which would give appropriate time for all to take
place?
That would probably be a Good Idea. Personally, I'd be happy if new
systems and re-writes of old ones were given conditional approval: that
is, instead of accepting them "ready or not," they'd be accepted for the
first release after they're complete to the point of being at least as
functional as what they're replacing. At most, there might be a
"testing spin" that includes some of the new, unfinished programs as
options so that they can get the testing they need, while the rest of us
don't end up as unwitting beta-testers. (People have accused Microsoft
for years of using their customers that way because of how much of their
new software sometimes seems poorly tested, and this is one thing Linux
shouldn't be copying from them.)