From: Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 12:19:49 -0500

Well we still have until the 29th either way. What we need right now I think
is input on which bugs both in the tracker and at
http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/SoftwareCodecPlayback are
"Release Critical" and then say "We release when those are resolved, and no
new critical ones have been added (or those that have are removed)" in my
opinion. I personally am alright with pushing it back, but there needs to be
a declared point at which it will be released, and in my opinion that could
best be handled by defining what IS release critical. A reevaluation of what
was originally defined.

On 5/15/06, Steve Moskovchenko <stevenm_at_umd.edu> wrote:
>
> I agree.
> Why not release a Beta version or something like that? Let's not be too
> driven purely by deadlines here. That is how we got Windows ME.
>
> A beta release now, followed by another week or so of bugfixing seems
> certainly reasonable.
>
> Just my $0.02
> Steve
>
> On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 18:08 +0100, gl wrote:
> > I second the
> > idea that if you need to release something it should be tagged as
> > 'pre-release' / '2.9b' or similar.
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQBEaLdLaqFovyB8QhARAnL6AJ4nRfDSAYqcF4YAgFai0a3AJgqmzACeMZ48
> aHrqjFIQNPITGYPUyXzfbko=
> =ZLBk
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
Received on 2006-05-15