cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chip Childers <>
Subject Re: Summary of IRC meeting in #cloudstack-meeting, Wed Jan 30 17:04:52 2013
Date Wed, 30 Jan 2013 21:03:43 GMT
Rohit, thank you very much for hosting the meeting!

There's one section of the discussion I want to address below:

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 12:54 PM, ASF IRC Services
<> wrote:
> 17:50:37 [bhaisaab]: ke4qqq: if we don't make it in time, are we going to cherry pick
them on 4.1 or they won't get into 4.1?
> 17:50:38 [ke4qqq]: - infra handed me 'keys' to help topcloud get the wiki html rendering
> 17:50:52 [ke4qqq]: bhaisaab: that's a question for our release manager :)
> 17:50:52 [bhaisaab]: ke4qqq: that was great
> 17:51:02 [bhaisaab]: ke4qqq: alright will post that on ML

So first, I want to address the release manager role a little bit.
I've been re-reading the Producing OSS book, and there are two
relevant sections.  First, the role of a "Release Owner" is described
[1] as more of a role of having "authority" over the contents of a
release.  The other role, one of a "Release Manager", is described [2]
as more of a facilitator for the community (executing mechanics and
helping keep things organized).

I'd like to state for the record that I prefer the "Release Manager"
model for this community, and I believe that we all have ownership of
the contents of each release.  This is the way that I've been trying
to act for 4.1, and it's indicative of why I *proposed* a release plan
/ schedule [3].  I was hoping (and continue to hope) that any
disagreements with the schedule would be (will be) raised, discussed
and that we would reach consensus as a community on what the right
plan should look like.

That being said, the question of "what happens if a feature doesn't
make it in time for the current release schedule's feature freeze?" is
actually more appropriately asked of the community as a whole.  I did
propose a feature freeze for Jan 31.  If that's not the community
consensus, then we can certainly change it with consensus around a
different plan / schedule.

With my individual contributor hat on, I feel like a hard feature
freeze is a good thing.  We should stick with it.  There will be more
releases after this one, and the better we get at following a
time-based schedule the easier and more predictable it will be for
ourselves and our users.  I personally don't think that anyone should
feel "rushed" to get something into a particular release.  It's better
to get things done *right*.

Thoughts, comments, flames?



View raw message