Hi devs, I feel I have been seeing "no timeframe" from Storm project (sadly I also had to use the word to explain the plan on Storm 2.0.0) at least starting in this year so I think we need to define what exactly the "no timeframe" is, to avoid the word to become a major issue for the project.
Personally, unless any pull requests or any shared plans or any transparent progress are provided, I'd rather treat "no timeframe" as "ASAP", not "eventually". (Sadly, again I have to admit that I didn't use the word with such meaning to explain the plan on Storm 2.0.0. It was just exactly same as what "no timeframe" originally means though I have in mind to make it being released ASAP.) Definitely it doesn't mean we should spend all their time to do the work. It means we should be open to explain about the (tentative) plan on their assigned issues and also open to explain the progress of the work transparently. This implicitly means that we are expected to be assignee on the issue only if we can start making a progress now or in short period, and open to someone taking over the issue if we couldn't make the progress for a long time. (It would be much nicer if we could even step down from assignee ourselves before someone asking to take over.) According to my definition above, being assignee to multiple open issues are not ideal, unless they're coupled. Maybe it is possible and valid to be assigned to several issues (may less than 5?) at once but not ideal to be assigned more than 10 even though issues are trivial. If someone is assigned to multiple open issues, they should be open to talk about priority of issues (simply which thing(s) to do first). We all are distributed and consists of multiple teams and also individuals. Sure we don't have stand-up like thing, and we don't sync up explicitly. We should consider about how we work practically in this nature, and I think being open and transparent is the key to success. Would like to hear your opinions about this. Thanks, Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) ps. Btw, my 2 cents, I don't mind allowing positive competitions in this project, like having no assignee and first (or better) implementor becoming an assignee. (If there's design doc or so, writer of design doc should become assignee to get any kinds of credit.) I feel we worked like this before.
