Development process analysis

[Gervase Markham]

Vlad Dascalu wrote:
> Secondly, this 6-month thing never got the chance to run in a normal 
> state. 

That's my point! So we shouldn't be doing re-analysis until we've had a 
chance to see what will happen when we actually implement this plan.

> Thirdly, the whole aim of "Shorter development cycles" would be broken 
> if we'd do what you suggest, by pushing/enlarging this particular 
> development cycle.

Oh, you mean the 9 month thing. That was just an add-on to the main 
point of what I'm saying - like I said, a separate discussion.

Gerv