On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Sylvain Lebresne <sylv...@datastax.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Eric Evans <eev...@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
