[Cosmo-dev] Cosmo 0.5 status

[Jeffrey Harris]

As a consumer of Cosmo, I'd prefer option 1), accept limited recurrence
features in the Cosmo UI, because I'd like to see Cosmo 0.5 on osaf.us
sooner rather than later.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey

Ted Leung wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> It looks like we're going to be working on the recurrence UI for at
> least another week, so I wanted to discuss possible options for the
> Cosmo 0.5 release.   Priscilla and I have discussed this a bit and it
> looks like there are several options:
> 
> 1) Issue a Cosmo 0.5 release with the current level of recurrence
> functionality and let the rest of the work happen in 0.6.   Cosmo 0.5
> was not going to be usable for casual collaborator users anyway, so from
> PPD's perspective, we aren't in trouble as long as 0.6 is actually
> useable (for casual collaborators).
> 
> Pros:
> - Lets us get a tested/stabilized version onto osaf.us, so that we can
> get more testing done before Chandler starts dogfooding on it
> - Allows Brian and Randy to get started on the new sharing format work -
> this is important because we need to keep in sync with Chandler.  On the
> other hand, Chandler 0.7a4 just got pushed
> <http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/chandler-dev/2006-October/007117.html>
> out till 10/24, so it may be hard to get Morgen's attention before then.
> - Helps us keep to our goal of shorter release cycles
> 
> Cons:
> - Limited recurrence functionality
> - We possibly interrupt Matthew's workflow/headspace on recurrence
> 
> Priscilla and I are in favor of this option
> 
> 2) Create a branch for the recurrence functionality and open up the
> trunk for 0.6 development
> 
> Pros:
> - Allows Brian and Randy to get started on the new sharing format work -
> this is important because we need to keep in sync with Chandler.  On the
> other hand, Chandler 0.7a4 just got pushed
> <http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/chandler-dev/2006-October/007117.html>
> out till 10/24, so it may be hard to get Morgen's attention before then.
> 
> Cons:
> - We'll have to merge back and forth to the branch
> 
> 3) Keep working on recurrence on the trunk and have people start putting
> additional stuff into the trunk (either 0.6 features or bugs)
> 
> Pros:
> - We get the entire working recurrence functionality set in 0.5 - but
> it's still not usable in the casual collaborator workflows
> - We don't interrupt Matthew's recurrence flow with 0.5 bugs - but we
> could just agree to punt all those bugs
> 
> Cons:
> - It will be hard to change the sharing format in the codebase used for 0.5
> 
> What do people think?   If we decide to go for a quick 0.5 release, how
> much time will we need?
> 
> Ted
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cosmo-dev mailing list
> cosmo-dev at lists.osafoundation.org
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo-dev