On Jun 12, 2006, at 11:46 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Jun 11, 2006, at 6:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Features would not get scheduled in until someone actually commits
to doing that feature.
I like this approach for most things. There will always be the
need to say "x needs to be fixed to ship this release" even if no
one is signed up to work on it. I just wish we'd vote or come to a
consensus on items like these *before* they get assigned to a
release. IMHO, having to +1 it to be added to the release means
among many things you 1) saw it, 2) know about it, 3) are fully
aware of what is outstanding and not yet being worked on, and 4)
you agree with it.
I'm fine voting on blocks of related issues all at once to speed up
the process.
I think having to agree before hand on what goes in and what's
required for a release will force us to talk about things earlier
in the release cycle rather than later.
Cool idea. I think we should try it out.
+1 to vote on scheduling a feature in a release
-dain
