> > > I meant that some people suggested making no milestone the default. I'm >> not sure what I think about that, I can see pros and cons. >> > > I'd vote for no milestone by default. As it currently is, I feel like my > tickets opened for 6.4 (#16222 for example) were simply forgotten. I now > know they are not, or at least not neccessarily, but it still feels that > way. With "no milestone" the default, we could make semantic use of > milestones, as outlined below. As they are now, they carry little to no > information, at least as far as I can see. So here is how I'd use > milestones: > > - Blockers must have a milestone, and will block that release > - Things which are fairly important and/or fairly simple could be > scheduled for the next release as well > - We might want to set a milestone when requesting review, when > granting review, or at the latest when closing > - When we set a milestone, we could use the next release for easy > changes which could make it into any beta at any time > - In contrast, major changes which might affect a lot of code should > probably be scheduled for an early beta of some release, so they might be > deliberately aimed at a milestone one release after the next one (e.g. my > work for #11542 feels a bit like this) > > These seem like helpful suggestions.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
