Agreed. I was very clearly not advocating for rushing in features. If you have followed my past emails, I have only strongly advocated features be worked in branches and get merged when they are in a reasonable state.
Each branch contributor group should look at their readiness and merge stuff in assuming that the branch reached a satisfactory state. That’s it. From release management perspective, blocking features just because we are a month close to the deadline is not reasonable. Let the branch contributors rationalize, make this decision and the rest of us can support them in making the decision. +Vinod > At this point, there have been three planned alphas from September 2016 until > July 2017 to "get in features". While a couple of upcoming features are "a > few weeks" away, I think all of us are aware how predictable software > development schedules can be. I think we can also all agree that rushing > just to meet a release deadline isn't the best practice when it comes to > software development either. > > Andrew has been very clear about his goals at each step and I think Wangda's > willingness to not rush in resource types was an appropriate response. I'm > sympathetic to the goals of getting in a feature for 3.0, but it might be a > good idea for each project that is a "few weeks away" to seriously look at > the readiness compared to the features which have been testing for 6+ months > already. > > -Ray
