asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Khurram Faraaz <khfaraa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] stabilization phase
Date Fri, 20 Nov 2015 03:21:53 GMT
+1

This will definitely help. Identify and Fix the major issues and that way
New Features will be much better. Otherwise, new features on top known
issues is risky.

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Mike Carey <dtabass@gmail.com> wrote:

> Agreed on all points...!
>
>
> On 11/19/15 1:27 PM, Yingyi Bu wrote:
>
>> IMO, the investment for stabilization would greatly speed-up future
>> innovations and experiments (if we manage to fix all the major/critical
>> issues by the end of that phase).
>> Everyone could face way less blocking issues and need way less hacks to
>> get
>> things work or grab experimental results:-)
>>
>> Best,
>> Yingyi
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Till Westmann <tillw@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> My main goal it to get the number of painful issues down and I agree that
>>> that doesn’t require that everything else stops. However, I think that it
>>> is likely take some toll on innovation as some time would be spent on
>>> fixing issues and merging fixes into the feature branches ..
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19 Nov 2015, at 12:18, Mike Carey wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 --- but --- to be clear, I don't think this is proposing an
>>>
>>>> every-hand-stops-innovating phase.  I think the proposal is for a mode
>>>> where MASTER is locked down and all folks do try and fix their higher
>>>> priority bugs on a weekly basis - but that folks who're working on
>>>> separate
>>>> things (e.g., spatial index performance or BAD approaches to data
>>>> handling)
>>>> would still do that, just not in master (which isn't where it's
>>>> happening
>>>> anyway).  Master would be closed for business until all "Major" and
>>>> above
>>>> bugs are indeed fixed.  (Because that's where we'll cut release branches
>>>> from, and that needs to be stabilized.)  @Till, is that a correct
>>>> understanding?  Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> On 11/19/15 10:49 AM, Ian Maxon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1. Our tests need a lot of work, so putting new features on the back
>>>>> burner will definitely help with getting that work done.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:43 AM, abdullah alamoudi <
>>>>> bamousaa@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ++1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Amoudi, Abdullah.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Yingyi Bu <buyingyi@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>> Yingyi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Till Westmann <tillw@apache.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> there are a number of discussions (on and off list) and other
>>>>>>>> indicators
>>>>>>>> (people on the users list not getting ahead) that we have
a
>>>>>>>> relatively
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> big
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> number of issues that affect both the usability (and adoption)
of the
>>>>>>>> system and the productivity of development.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that it would be good to move into a stabilization
phase
>>>>>>>> for a
>>>>>>>> while. In such a phase we would focus on addressing known
issues and
>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>> add new features to master is there is broad agreement (on
this
>>>>>>>> list)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the feature is an exception. The goal of the phase would be to
>>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> issues of priority “Major” and above (with the option of
agreeing on
>>>>>>>> de-prioritizing issues …) and to increase test coverage.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thoughts? Concerns? Questions?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> P.S. I think that the 0.8.8 release should not be affected
by
>>>>>>>> entering
>>>>>>>> such a phase.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message