User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.8) Gecko/20071022 Ubuntu/7.10 (gutsy) Firefox/2.0.0.8 Build Identifier: From the recent thread regarding 4.4.2 Olivier Fourdan wrote: > On 11/2/07, Fernando Maróstica <fmarostica@fmarostica.org> wrote: >> 2007/10/17 or 2007/11/17 Benedikt? > > We are not yet able to schedule releases in the past. I think this is a -major- failing of Xfce. If we want to be able to really compete with Gnome on the desktop we need to stop thinking of ourselves as volunteers in an open source project, and start thinking of ourselves as benders of time and space. Gnome has moved to a regular release schedule, and it's getting more and more difficult to keep up. Even the step of making our major version number (4) permanently double Gnome's (2) has done little to stop the onslaught of minor release numbers that increase -every six freaking months-. Scheduling Xfce releases regardless of time/space coordinates is the only way to take Xfce to the next level, except for maybe adding a display manager. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Check email 2. Notice that Future Olivier has yet to release Xfce 5.Awesome.WeFixedAllBugs.Ever. Note - due to causality, the reproducibility of this bug may not only vanish, but cause this bug report to disappear as well.
I think we should just bump 4.4.2 up to 6.24.56 instead.
May Xfce be released and unreleased at the same time? What does the cat think about this?
I know this is a serious matter .. yet, why do we care about GNOME or KDE? I think we simply cannot compete with them in terms of organisational background and company support. And that includes having a regular release schedule. We _ARE_ volunteers in an open source project .. most of us got regular jobs occupying most of their time .. or in Brian's case, he spends his nights coding on random applications that just sprung to his mind .. ;^P Anyway, I think you're right .. but unless we do not get a team of .. say, two or three individuals who dedicate their to preparing releases, pushing them out and kicking our butts to get bugs fixed in time .. I'm afraid we are probably going to have to close this bug as 'LATER' or 'WONTFIX' .. as reckless as that my sound.
This may help us: http://kadreg.org/ipot/
Moving invalid bugs to the /dev/null product.