On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Alex Huang <alex.hu...@citrix.com> wrote: >> >> I'm suggesting that there is risk, and that we need to agree on a >> mitigation for that risk. I'm not suggesting anything beyond that. >> >> What happens if it takes you longer than a day or two to get Javelin >> and master merged? What do we do then? Do you want to delay the >> 4.1.0 release schedule day for day? >> >> Or perhaps this isn't enough of a risk (I need your input here) to >> even bother talking about mitigations? >> >> Thanks! > > Chip, > > It's difficult to assess the risk until all the code that needs to be merged > in is in. From experience, we did four merges from master, each merge was > progressively easier and faster than the previous. From that perspective, I > think the risk should be low. > > I'm fine with the risk suggestion. There obviously is one. I do think that > we move javelin to the end of the code freeze to help the entire community so > that instead of everyone merging javelin into their branch, javelin takes the > hit of merging everyone else's work. So, it doesn't make sense that there is > the option of dropping javelin if it couldn't be merged in one or two days. > If it takes a couple of weeks again, then we can consider such an option. > But if it's within that, we should consider day-to-day slip. > > --Alex >
Let's hope the trend of increasing ease continues! And I'm good with us adjusting schedule (if needed) as we go. We should ALL plan on supporting / helping get the javelin code in shape after pulling in the feature from master. Now let's get these features in, and get rolling on the merge! -chip
