Thanks for proposing this Matthias. A couple of questions: 1. How did you decide where to increase the time? 2. Do you think there's a risk that having more time won't necessarily help, we will just try to fit more things? I've seen that happen in similar circumstances.
Ismael On Tue, Sep 29, 2020, 7:29 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > when we introduced time based releases, we added certain deadlines to > streamline the release process and to make sure we can ship the release > on time. Based on early experience, we adjusted those deadlines and > introduced new deadlines which improved the situation. > > However, we still have the issue that it often takes very long to > stabilize a release branch and the release was delayed by several weeks. > > Thus, I am wondering if we should adjust those deadlines again. > Currently, we have > > - KIP freeze > - Feature freeze (+1 week) > - Code freeze (+2 weeks) > - Target release date (+2 weeks) > > I would like to propose to extend the deadlines as follows: > > - KIP freeze > - Feature freeze (+2 weeks) > - Code freeze (+2 weeks) > - Target release date (+3 weeks) > > This would give us 2 more weeks. Note, that we would not put the target > release date 2 week later, but put KIP freeze 2 weeks earlier. > > It does of course not come for free. In particular, having 2 weeks > (instead of 1 week) between feature freeze and code freeze implies a > longer period when PR needs to be double committed. However, from my > personal experience, I don't think that this burden on committers it too > high. > > Looking forward to your feedback. > > > -Matthias >
