To say it another way, I would expect that once a roadmap is agreed we would ensure there was a CEP for every item. I don't know whether every CEP would necessarily be voted into a roadmap, nor whether every item voted on would have a CEP before the vote is conducted, and don't have a strongly held position on either (but think it's probably better they're not intrinsically tied in either direction).
On 01/03/2021, 12:13, "Benedict Elliott Smith" <bened...@apache.org> wrote: I guess I meant that I don't foresee roadmap discussions having a hard requirement of CEP for all goals we might discuss, though it would probably be expected that many of the biggest proposals would already at least have a minimal CEP to be filed, you're right. Certainly if an advanced CEP exists I hadn't meant to exclude it, I more meant that the CEP process is quite involved and spans the lifetime of the work, and a roadmap helps the project decide on goals irrespective of a CEP, and helps resource a CEP early in its lifecycle. On 01/03/2021, 11:15, "Mick Semb Wever" <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > I think of a roadmap as a pre-CEP activity for upcoming releases, items > thereon beginning the CEP process, … > What about having it the other way around? That the roadmap is a visualisation of the CEPs, i.e. those past initial triage that have initial commitment and momentum. A reflective approach of the roadmap, just a visualisation of existing processes, prevents the adding of a new process to the community. It will also incentivise the thoroughness of new CEPs. The benefit of having the roadmap as a separate manual process pre-CEP might save us the cost of creating CEPs that get rejected, but I can't see that actually being a problem for us. +1 to having the roadmap, in any form. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org