incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eric Evans <eev...@acunu.com>
Subject Re: 6 months a more realistic release cycle?
Date Sat, 21 Apr 2012 20:01:29 GMT
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Sylvain Lebresne <sylvain@datastax.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Eric Evans <eevans@acunu.com> wrote:
>> I'm not opposed, but I'd rather see us try a longer release cycle
>> before introducing too much rigor here.
>
> I had hoped that my suggestion above would not be felt as being
> rigorous :(. At least that was not the intention.

Sorry, I don't have any problems with those dates per say, what I
meant was that with a longer release cycle, maybe we won't have to be
any more strict about the deadline(s).

> But to be clear, I don't want us to get too rigorous either. However,
> and as much as I'm all for "let's all be smart", the project is
> growing, we have more committers and we may get hopefully even more in
> the future, and I think it's unrealistic to expect everyone to be on
> the same page through some kind of magical mental communication.
> Basically I don't want to impose rigor, I want to add some form of
> schedule (on which we can all agree on) so that the project does goes
> into the direction we all want to. Basically I think it's more easy
> (and more sane) to agree a priori at least on the big picture, than to
> have to react when you're not happy with how this go. It's more open
> too.

Yeah, that was sort of where I was going with the roadmap idea.  Set
the expectations up front so that people know what they're
individually obligated to do in order to land a feature, as opposed to
just setting a freeze date(s) (which seems to result in hurried 11th
hour changes).

There are all sorts of problems with the idea of a roadmap.  For
starters, we'd have to agree on the roadmap. :)  6 months is also a
plenty of time for things to change, and make the roadmap irrelevant.
I was just throwing it out there as one possible idea for avoiding
scope creep.

> But anyway, all I really want is for us developer to have 2 dates in
> mind: "hum, I have to do that big issue before X if I want it in
> version Y" and then "hum, I have to fix that small problem without
> waiting to be 2 days before the release date because we need it in".
> And I think it's just easier if those dates are fixed in advance.
>
> We could get even more fancy and write feature roadmap and whatnot,
> but that was not even part of my suggestion and I think it would be
> harder to do.

Definitely harder, yes.

-- 
Eric Evans
Acunu | http://www.acunu.com | @acunu

Mime
View raw message