Yes, absolutely my goal isn't to prohibit work outside of the roadmap.
For really large, complex items of work that potentially require wide input
from community e.g. because of semantic or stability implications (i.e. the
kind we only deliver a handful per release), I think it would be legitimate
(and helpful) for the community to pause integration of work until either the
roadmap can be adjusted (to deprioritise other items taking its focus) or until
the roadmap catches up. The community has only so much capacity for those kinds
of contributions each release, and I think it is beneficial to the project to
manage that capacity, and also to ensure such major contributions get due
attention. But only the biggest organisations are going to be even remotely
constrained by this, and they're able to re-shape the roadmap, so it's less a
restriction and more a mechanism to ensure collaboration and communication on
the riskiest contributions.
This is of course all up for debate, but I think this would be both a benefit
of a roadmap, and also strengthen its other utilities by helping keep the
roadmap accurate and honest.
On 01/03/2021, 10:16, "Sumanth Pasupuleti" <sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com>
wrote:
+1 to the idea of the project roadmap and the said benefits for planning.
In my opinion, it certainly does a world of good for visibility on what is
in the works/ what to look forward to for both the developers as well as
users. So long as "allowed work" is not restricted to items in the project
roadmap and developers can still make contributions to work unlisted in the
project roadmap, I think having a project roadmap is certainly a step in
the right direction.
Thanks,
Sumanth
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 1:18 AM Benedict Elliott Smith <bened...@apache.org>
wrote:
> A while back somebody privately raised the idea of a project roadmap to
> me, and I’d like to propose we formally consider it as a project now that
> 4.0 is approaching completion.
>
>
>
> I think there are two major benefits to agreeing a roadmap:
>
>
>
> 1) It helps us to coordinate finite project resources between multiple
> entities, as we can signal to each other what our priorities are, agree to
> prioritise items on the roadmap, and plan cross-organisation capacity
> necessary for each roadmap item.
>
> 2) It signals to the wider user community what to expect, facilitating
> confidence in project health and direction. I think this will be
> particularly helpful as 4.0 is announced, given the extraordinary amount
of
> time that passed between 3.11 and 4.0.
>
>
>
> I think of a roadmap as a pre-CEP activity for upcoming releases, items
> thereon beginning the CEP process, with target releases being assigned by
> the roadmap (subject to revision) and project members opting-in to the
> endeavour to deliver for that release. I don’t think it should lead to
> work progressing only on roadmap items, but that other major endeavours
> (i.e. those entailing large impact to the project, or requiring lots of
> cross-org input) could be put on hold until the earlier roadmap items were
> properly resourced (or the roadmap revised).
>
>
>
> What do people think?
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
