[Mono-list] RE: [Mono-devel-list] Surveys: Mono 1.0 andMonoConference.

[Jonathan Gilbert]

At 07:54 PM 11/10/2003 +0100, Jay Bennie jay-at-lincore.co.uk |mono-list
subscription| wrote:
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: <yoros@wanadoo.es>
>
>> > I think the solution to this particular problem is:
>> >
>> > * Release with a name that specifically states whats in it
>> >
>> > Mono Core 1.0
>> >
>> > * Release a roadmap with the plans for when features will be
>> >   added to the full Mono release.
>> >
>> > Maybe we need better names than `Mono Core' and `Mono Full'.
>> >
>>
>> I think that the best we can do without SWF is to release:
>>
>> "Mono Server Edition 1.0"
>>
>> And be sure all corlib, ASP.NET, WebServiced, etc... are full featured.
>>
>
>for the moment dont use grand names, we do not want to start the media
>bandwaggon untill we are at the point where we can capitalise on it.
>
>use simple unassuming names that are obviouse to developers -for example
>Miguel suggested  "Mono Core 1.0" .
>
>It may even be an idea to start reffering to mono in terms of milestone code
>names in the way MS treat there OS development i.e. Whister -> Windows XP,
>then when a full compliment of stable 100% compatible Mono Parts are
>avaliable, make a press release along the lines of "Mono v1.0 Framework" and
>"Mono C# Development Tools v1.0" are ready for public consumption this way
>the end users and end developers will not be mixing up the unstable
>development code with the *stable* production code.

Another thing to consider is that 1.0 could be released in stages. The
initial 1.0 release could be presented as "Mono Core 1.0 Beta", or simply
"Mono 1.0 Beta". When it comes time for another release, if it still hasn't
reached final production quality then it could be called "Mono 1.0 Beta 2".
When the code reaches final release stages, "Mono 1.0 Release Candidate 1"
could be released. If any remaining major bugs are found, they could be
fixed and "Mono 1.0 Release Candidate 2" could be released

Finally, after it has been publicly used, but by people who are fully aware
that it is still not a final release (even management people know what
"Beta" means), and after all known bugs have been ironed out, "Mono 1.0"
could be finally released, with an emphasis on press coverage and possibly
a release party with seminars and hacking machines for people to play with
and such.

It would delay the final release of Mono, but it would give it in my
opinion much-needed additional time for flattening bugs in the code. I am
certain that once people outside of the mono community begin playing with
mono, a whole new wave of bugs, deficiencies and quirks will flood in,
which will all need to be fixed before Mono can be taken seriously by
companies which would depend on it for their livelihood.

Just my take on it,

Jonathan Gilbert