On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: > On 01/16/2013 04:13 PM, Sudha Ponnaganti wrote: >> >> Would like to bring up the topic of when to close New features/ >> Improvements. >> >> I understand that we are closing new features/ improvements once we have >> completed dependent subtasks like QA/ Documentation are done but we did not >> call out dependency on defects explicitly. Usually we would not call it >> done till we complete 1 cycle of QA and there are no outstanding P1 issues >> exist as sometimes the implementation might not be in alignment with >> requirements or do not meet supportability requirements. >> >> Given that we did not call out dependency and closure criteria explicitly, >> I think we are treating feature done once QA/ Doc are done. >> >> However would like to propose that QA would reopen the new >> tasks/improvements if implementation is not done as per the requirements or >> if there are serious issues with the implementation ie like a blocker for a >> primary use case. >> >> > > Well, I think I have to re-implement much of the RBD code for 4.1 and I'm > not sure if I can do that in time.
Wido - I thought Alex and Edison said that you wouldn't have to re-implement the code? > I don't want RBD to become a blocker, but I also think there is no QA at all > for this code, is there? > > Wido >
