In a message written on Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 12:24:44PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
Why would the 240/4 updates blow the schedule?
More code, more regression testing, same number of programmers. Do the math.
Less code, every patch produced to date /removes/ code. More regression testing, same number of programmes, ok.
Take it as a given that it *will* slip the schedule some amount, because the resources for a 240/4 feature will have to come from somewhere. So how much slippage are you willing to accept?
Ok, I'll accept a month slippage in IPv6 "features". (What are we still waiting on, anyway?) I also believe that's also about 29 more days than most vendors should need to do the job. -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org