Krita 1.6

[Bart Coppens]

On Monday 06 February 2006 00:16, Sander Koning wrote:
> Keeping to the core and only doing small additions (and fibes to currently
> known bugs, for example) will, IMO, decrease the chance on major breakage,
> and more stable code means more time to concentrate on usage.
Yeah :-)

> Nothing against OOo, but my experience there with snapshot releases is that
> they tend to take huge amounts of time and always bring up more problems
> than expected.
The point was more that one of our strong points appears to be the reduced 
size that we have, compared to OOo. But indeed, snapshot releases do bring 
their own set of problems in (it's good PR, though).

> > There are lots of other people who could do it with good guidance, but I
> > guess release guy schedules are much more prone to interfering with real
> > life schedules, than the regular 'just get your features/fixes in before
> > the freeze' schedule.
> Real life? Explain :)
Well, for example if you have exams you hadn't foreseen in that area of time, 
you can probably drop planned features because of them as a developer, but 
dropping a release because of that is more troublesome (bad, bad PR).

> Seriously though, I can imagine releases are hard, but as already said in
> other words I think the advantages weigh up to the costs in this case.
Yeah :)

> > Good idea, but then they'd probably need a release guy since it'd involve
> > i18n, documentation, packagers, and so on.
>
> Forgot to react on that one... I'm in favour.
:-)

Bart