> Is there _actual pressure_ from a defined source (who I can speak to), or > is it something such as "we're really overdue already", etc?
| That's setting the bar a bit high, don't you think? Those of us at Summit have all had the dubious pleasure of telling users that the feature they asked about isn't available in a release yet. Should we follow up that bad news by asking them to go out of their way to contact some random guy who's not there, or sign a statement spelling out exactly what effect lack of that feature had on their decision not to deploy GlusterFS? Should you provide similar proof regarding your claims about lack of documentation? Of course not. We all get that poor documentation hurts the project. Some of us have even tried to do something about that. Most of us also realize that releases dragging on too long *also* hurt the project in a variety of ways. Having to maintain an active current-release branch in addition to master is a drag on development. Users are ill served by being unable to get fixes for actual bugs in easily consumable form. We're dealing with a tradeoff here, not something where one side gets to put on a white hat and jam the black hat on somebody else. I'm deliberately not taking a position on whether or not we should release with the documentation in its current state. All I'm saying is that making inequitable demands of one another, or trying to portray one another as failing to appreciate users' needs, hurts the project even more than either poor documentation or late releases. That's an issue on which I *am* willing to take a stand. _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel