Hi,

+1 to having a feature freeze date. June 1st is earlier than I would have 
picked.

Ariel

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018, at 10:57 AM, Josh McKenzie wrote:
> +1 here for June 1.
> 
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > +1
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 8:31 PM, Blake Eggleston <beggles...@apple.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On 4/4/18, 5:48 PM, "Jeff Jirsa" <jji...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >     Earlier than I’d have personally picked, but I’m +1 too
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >     --
> > >     Jeff Jirsa
> > >
> > >
> > >     > On Apr 4, 2018, at 5:06 PM, Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >     >
> > >     > Top-posting as I think this summary is on point - thanks, Scott!
> > (And
> > >     > great to have you back, btw).
> > >     >
> > >     > It feels to me like we are coalescing on two points:
> > >     > 1. June 1 as a freeze for alpha
> > >     > 2. "Stable" is the new "Exciting" (and the testing and dogfooding
> > >     > implied by such before a GA)
> > >     >
> > >     > How do folks feel about the above points?
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >> Re-raising a point made earlier in the thread by Jeff and affirmed
> > > by Josh:
> > >     >>
> > >     >> –––
> > >     >> Jeff:
> > >     >>>> A hard date for a feature freeze makes sense, a hard date for a
> > > release
> > >     >>>> does not.
> > >     >>
> > >     >> Josh:
> > >     >>> Strongly agree. We should also collectively define what "Done"
> > > looks like
> > >     >>> post freeze so we don't end up in bike-shedding hell like we have
> > > in the
> > >     >>> past.
> > >     >> –––
> > >     >>
> > >     >> Another way of saying this: ensuring that the 4.0 release is of
> > > high quality is more important than cutting the release on a specific
> > date.
> > >     >>
> > >     >> If we adopt Sylvain's suggestion of freezing features on a
> > "feature
> > > complete" date (modulo a "definition of done" as Josh suggested), that
> > will
> > > help us align toward the polish, performance work, and dog-fooding needed
> > > to feel great about shipping 4.0. It's a good time to start thinking
> > about
> > > the approaches to testing, profiling, and dog-fooding various
> > contributors
> > > will want to take on before release.
> > >     >>
> > >     >> I love how Ben put it:
> > >     >>
> > >     >>> An "exciting" 4.0 release to me is one that is stable and usable
> > >     >>> with no perf regressions on day 1 and includes some of the big
> > >     >>> internal changes mentioned previously.
> > >     >>>
> > >     >>> This will set the community up well for some awesome and exciting
> > >     >>> stuff that will still be in the pipeline if it doesn't make it to
> > > 4.0.
> > >     >>
> > >     >> That sounds great to me, too.
> > >     >>
> > >     >> – Scott
> > >     >
> > >     > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ---------
> > >     > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > >     > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> > >     >
> > >
> > >     ------------------------------------------------------------
> > ---------
> > >     To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > >     For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org

Reply via email to