Hey, I originally thought the code freeze was to have time to fix/test/verify "high-risk" (or any risk) PRs. To have a week to deal with "whoops something broke" scenarios and still hit our deadlines without a manic rush. Ideally everything should be merged before code freeze day though, I'm guilty as charged here, but if the above description of the code freeze is somewhat accurate then it's not that "bad". IMO
Curious to see what other people think. On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > We agreed on having a 1 week code freeze - yet i'm now merging PRs on code > freeze day. bad? > > I'm not sure it is. I guess it *could* have been bad if someone tried to > jam in a massive change during code freeze week and the PR was full of > holes and risks. Seems like we were smart enough to mitigate that for this > release as we carefully watched the "high-risk" JIRA tickets on the way > into code freeze. If we continue to do that, I imagine we'd be fine, but > all committers will have to be responsible in their choices as it pertains > to PRs. > > Anyway, just thought I'd bring it up, in case anyone had any thoughts they > wanted to share on procedural changes in this area. >
