brendan at mozilla.org
Thu Jan 22 16:39:06 PST 2015
Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
> I particularly don't like the idea that things could be dropped or
> rushed last minute just because the new years eve is coming ... this
> feel like those stories with tight deadlines where management could
> easily fail due over-expectations on all possible 3rd parts alignment
> ( you know, like those 12 different JS engines out there .... + spartans )
No last minute slips -- that's a schedule-chicken outcome (where the
cars do not collide but one veers and drives off a cliff!).
The new stuff has to board its "release train" or its champions and fans
will be sad, and perhaps take a credibility hit. This doesn't mean
larger work must be broken down into too many pieces, but that is a risk.
Larger work that can track across multiple years is always risky -- in
my experience it very often aims for a target near Alpha Centauri at
sublight speed, when the real action was over at Tau Ceti due to an FTL
breakthrough, but no one knew at first that (a) FTL was possible; or (b)
the Centauri systems were uninhabitable. If you get what I mean ;-).
(Spartan uses Chakra, last I heard.)
Mature projects can do rapid-er release more easily than young ones, for
sure. I recall 4.2BSD Unix, then 4.3, and a bit of 4.4.
> I do like the idea of having more frequent rolling releases, but yet I
> don't know why year-naming would be the choice.
Does the name matter? You seemed to be objecting on more substantive
grounds. Don't back off to mere quibbling about labels!
> Anyway, please consider keeping ES6 exactly ES6, we will have time to
> align the ESX where X = previous ESX +2009 concept.
> to Doctor Alex, at this point I think you should really stick with ES6
> or avoid the ES at all and use JS 2015
anything near the Ecma standard, because trademark. :-/
More information about the es-discuss