Le 02/03/2017 23:46, Matt Riedemann a écrit : > I mentioned this in the nova meeting today [1] but wanted to post to the > ML for feedback. > > We didn't talk about spec or feature freeze dates at the PTG. The Pike > release schedule is [2]. > > Spec freeze > ----------- > > In Newton and Ocata we had spec freeze on the first milestone. > > I'm proposing that we do the same thing for Pike. The first milestone > for Pike is April 13th which gives us about 6 weeks to go through the > specs we're going to approve. A rough look at the open specs in Gerrit > shows we have about 125 proposed and some of those are going to be > re-approvals from previous releases. We already have 16 blueprints > approved for Pike. Keep in mind that in Newton we had ~100 approved > blueprints by the freeze and completed or partially completed 64. >
I agree with you, letting more time for accepting more specs means less time for merging more spec implementations. That still leaves 6 weeks for accepting around 80 specs, which seems to me enough. > Feature freeze > -------------- > > In Newton we had a non-priority feature freeze between n-1 and n-2. In > Ocata we just had the feature freeze at o-3 for everything because of > the short schedule. > > We have fewer core reviewers so I personally don't want to cut off the > majority of blueprints too early in the cycle so I'm proposing that we > do like in Ocata and just follow the feature freeze on the p-3 milestone > which is July 27th. > > We will still have priority review items for the release and when push > comes to shove those will get priority over other review items, but I > don't think it's helpful to cut off non-priority blueprints before n-3. > I thought there was a fair amount of non-priority blueprint code that > landed in Ocata when we didn't cut it off early. Referring back to the > Ocata blueprint burndown [3] most everything was completed between the > 2nd milestone and feature freeze. > Looks good to me too. Proposing and advertising one review sprint day (or even two days) around pike-2 could also help us, because we could have this kind of 'runway' between proposers and reviewers. If so, after pike-2, we could just see how many blueprints are left for the last milestone which could help us having a better vision on what we could realistically feature for Pike. My .02€ -Sylvain > -- > > Does anyone have an issue with this plan? If not, I'll update [4] with > the nova-specific dates. > > [1] > http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/nova/2017/nova.2017-03-02-21.00.log.html#l-119 > > [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Nova/Pike_Release_Schedule > [3] > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-February/111639.html > > [4] https://releases.openstack.org/pike/schedule.html > __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev