[tei-council] next release?

[Piotr Bański]

I do agree that sooner is better... It's just that I tend to panic when
thinking of all the deadlines coming together :-)

As for the telco, it just seemed to me that the rapid interaction mode
may be useful for quick exchanges on some outstanding pre-release
issues, where we may lack energy for long e-mail discussions about
sometimes tiny details. Updates and reports, OTOH, seem a bit
monologueish in nature, and thus not requiring a telco (maybe).

(Let me note, however, that for 10 days before the 23rd, I am rather
sure that I will not be able to participate. Just mentioning that in
case you decide to have a pre-release telco after all, with the release
on the 25th -- so that it doesn't look like I was arguing for that and
then decided to abstain.)

Best,

  P.


On 24/04/12 11:42, James Cummings wrote:
> 
> What do others think? We can of course move releasing back to 
> whenever we've finished a majority of tickets, but I'd prefer 
> sooner rather than later and a deadline that forces us to get 
> stuff done.
> 
> I'm of the opinion that we probably don't need to telco before 
> this release (we can, after all, conduct business on the mailing 
> list), but would do so shortly after the release to get updates 
> on the longer-term issues and reports from the council working 
> groups.
> 
> thoughts?
> 
> -James
> 
> 
> On 23/04/12 22:20, Piotr Bański wrote:
>> Hi James,
>>
>> Isn't May 25 roughly in the middle of LREC? Could we shift by a week
>> from then, please?
>>
>> (I actually intend to be ready with my stuff [and possibly more] in
>> advance this time, but I've made some such totally honest promises to
>> myself and to the world recently, several times, and with meager results...)
>>
>> Ah. Will we telco before releasing?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>    P.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23/04/12 17:47, James Cummings wrote:
>>>
>>> How about we set a notional target release date of 25 May?  (This
>>> is about 5 weeks from now.) If we assume that we want most things
>>> completed by the end of Sunday 20th, to allow time for
>>> proofreading and error spotting.
>>>
>>> Does that sounds reasonable to most people?
>>>
>>> Gaby: Most importantly, does the proposed Release Technician like
>>> these dates?
>>>
>>> -James
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21/04/12 18:50, Martin Holmes wrote:
>>>> Three weeks will be a bit tough for me, and a couple of the tickets I
>>>> have might turn out to have unpredicted side-effects (like the tei_
>>>> prefix). As long as we have the option to launch without the change if
>>>> it proves difficult, we could go with three weeks.
>>>>
>>>> The attributes-without-examples problem is so large that we'll just have
>>>> to hack away at it steadily.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> On 12-04-21 04:03 AM, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>>>>> something we forgot to debate in Ann Arbor was a timetable
>>>>> for the next release, I think? i.e. what is the due date for
>>>>> everyone to complete their ticket work so that Sir Gabriel
>>>>> of B'odard can undertake his Quest.
>>>>>
>>>>> speaking for myself, if I don't do my assignments
>>>>> more or less immediately I will not get to them for ages,
>>>>> so I favour a short window (say, 3 weeks).
>>>>>
>>>>> Sebastian
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
>