On 16 January 2011 21:07, Geir Bækholt <[email protected]> wrote: > On 14-01-2011 22:24, Elizabeth Leddy wrote: >> >> Whaddup FWT - >> >> I would like to get a conversation going about reworking the PLIP >> process. We had some good conversations on IRC about making the process >> mor continuous so I want to formalize the discussion a bit. Here are my >> initial thoughts on how to revamp the process coupled with some >> reactions to the current process: > > Another comment from the sideline, not from the FWT. I think these are very > sane ideas and will help us do what we need: Smaller releases more often! > From a marketing perspective, Plone really needs to show that there is a lot > happening, — and one of the most important ways of doing that is making > releases. > > The deadline-model we are currently using do not seem to work well enough to > keep the pace up, even with the awesome efforts we have seen from release > managers. > > Martin's concerns are valid, but i believe they can be overcome, and IMO > they are far outweighed bu the benefits of the new proposed model.
I suspect they can be overcome by release managers setting target dates, asking people to contribute to a particular milestone date for a particular planned release, but not holding up a release if people slip. Many smaller deadlines can be better than fewer big ones. Martin _______________________________________________ Framework-Team mailing list [email protected] http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
