Re: Re: [Plone-developers] The new Plone 4.0, was Re: Plone 3.5
Ricardo Alves <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework,gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.devel,gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.documentation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Steve McMahon wrote: > My only concern about calling Hanno's incremental change list 4.0 is > that we don't suffer from big-number expectation syndrome. This is the biggest risk I guess, a major release with just a minor set of visible (UI) improvements, will bring bad publicity. > > If we start thinking that 4.0 "has to be big enough" to justify the > numbering jump, and start expanding too much on the "yes" list, we > won't get this out in 2009. And, it won't serve the purpose of > delivering enough new stuff to keep folks excited while waiting for > the big UI items. > > So, a couple of questions for us all: > > 1) If we call it Plone 4.0, can we restrict ourselves to a modest list > of improvements that will actually get coded this summer and tested > this fall? > > 2) If we call it Plone 4.0, can we resist ourselves to changes that > will not break existing theme products or well-constructed Plone 3 add > ons? Isn't that already the promise of the 3.x series? I mean, to be keep backward compatibility with Plone 3.0 addons? I still think that some of these improvements should be included in one or more 3.x releases. Ricardo > On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Ross Patterson <[email protected]> wrote: >> Lennart Regebro <[email protected]> >> writes: >> >>> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 22:05, Ross Patterson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Sorry if I'm resurrecting an already fairly resolved debate. None of >>>> the concerns I raise here are enough to vote -1 one calling it >>>> 4.0. But if enough people feel as I do here, maybe we should discuss >>>> a little further. What about plone 3.9? >>> 3.0.x was very buggy, and I think that has been somewhat saved by the >>> upgrades to 3.1 and 3.2 being so painless. I think it would be, for >>> that reason, a big mistake to introduce bigger changes in 3.X unless >>> we can make sure the upgrade is quite painless and the changes are >>> *very* stable. >> Yeah, I guess trying to have a release line that can grow is trying to >> have it both ways. I'm very concerned about the expectations we've been >> developing about Plone 4 and the impact that will have on perceptions >> when we say, "Yeah, that's plone 5 now" or worse yet the even less >> confidence inducing "Yeah, that's plone trunk now." But I guess the >> right response to that issue is to be more disciplined in our messaging >> in the future and *not* talk about release numbers before the release >> process has had a chance to weigh in. IOW, any perceptual/expectation >> problems we have from this may be our just desserts. :) >> >> +1 to calling it 4.0. +1 to constraining ourselves to not include >> additional disruptive changes in the newly established 4.0 line and thus >> to only include them in subsequent major versions. +100 to not talking >> about version 5 until the 5 FWT has actually done enough of it's process >> to have some formal establishment of expectations. >> >> Then I'll just have to buck up and tell people that a better skinning >> story will *not* being Plone 4 afterall and that I can't tell them it >> will be in Plone 5 and that somehow they shouldn't be discouraged by >> that. :( >> >> Ross >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your >> production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but thanks to >> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW KODAK i700 >> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image >> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com >> _______________________________________________ >> Plone-developers mailing list >> Plone-developers-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-developers >> > > > -- Ricardo Alves <[email protected]> Eurotux <http://www.eurotux.com>