On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Bill Erickson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Mike Rylander <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Bill Erickson <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Mike Rylander <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Bill, >>>> >>>> First, thanks for putting out a timeline. >>>> >>>> I am a little concerned about the pre-beta feature freeze. In the >>>> past, the merge deadline for features has always been "whatever makes it >>>> into the beta release", and I don't see cutting that back by a week helping >>>> things to get done faster -- we just end up with a week less features in >>>> 2.8, and that last week is often (us being humans, and whatnot) the >>>> critical push time for things that are almost there. Do you have something >>>> in mind that I'm not seeing for the change there? >>>> >>> >>> The feature freeze basically is the beta. (I recall now this was called >>> the "beta cut-off" during the 2.6 cycle. I'll use this terminology going >>> forward). The interval between the cut-off and beta release cutting is our >>> chance to let the dust settle after the merge rush so we're not cutting a >>> buggy beta. If Feb 18th is too soon, we can certainly push the beta back. >>> >>> >> I won't fight you hard on the week between cut-off and beta wrapping, but >> IMO it doesn't serve much purpose. Believe me, I know better than most that >> betas often don't get the attention they deserve, and because of that it >> feels (again, to me and maybe not to anyone else) like a week of doldrums. >> But if you feel that week will help you shake things out as RM, I'll >> mentally s/25/18/ the beta date >> > > I didn't really explain my expectations of the cut-off interval very > well. It's definitely helpful for the RM (finalizing the DB upgrade, > compiling release notes, misc. cleanup, etc.), but to me it's more about > developers testing this shiny new thing that we're about to call the Beta, > particularly since it's the first time some of the features will be living > together. A group sniff test, if you will. (ewwww). > > Gotcha. I was attributing some of Ben's observations to your motives, but not entirely rightly. I would expect most of the feature branches to be merged before the cut-off, but those ones at the end will tend to be less-well-tested in combination, so the sniff test reason is totally sane and sound. Thanks for helping me see the logic. :) > I see your point about the doldrums, though. A week is probably too > long. Let's push the beta cut-off up to the 20th? > > "Merge by the end of the week" seems like a good idea to me, so I'm +1 to that. Thanks! -miker -b > >>
