Hi Francesco, The release strategy seems reasonable to me, and it's good to have such a comprehensive roadmap. I have a slight fear that such a roadmap might be seen to be "set in stone" though - if a developer is willing to put in the work for feature X scheduled for Q3 2013 to get it done for Q4 2012 for example, will this be accommodated in the roadmap accordingly?
Colm. On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > waiting for 1.0.0-RC1 to be voted on general@incubator ML, I've spent > some time with Fabio trying to elaborate the features gathered so far for > our roadmap; results are available at [1]. > > My idea is to take this as a starting ground for discussing our actual > release plan; some constraints / assumptions were taken while reviewing [1]: > > 1. Current release (1.0.0 Espressivo) will not get new features, only > bugfixes > 2. We want to keep labelling release numbers with terms gathered from > music (originally, the idea behind this was that Syncope "orchestrates" > users, roles, resources, ...) > 3. The amount of work to be done for each release is roughly the same > 4. We want to keep the release cycle as frequent as possible, but still > deliver a consistent set of features > 5. Priority was given based on two criteria: first of all, try to > complete Syncope as IdM, then our own understanding and preferences > 6. Release dates are estimated based on the work done so far by active > developers: we really hope to get more of these, and that estimates are too > large > > Any feedback is welcome. > Best regards. > > [1] > https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/SYNCOPE/**Roadmap<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SYNCOPE/Roadmap> > > -- > Francesco Chicchiriccò > > ASF Member, Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member > http://people.apache.org/~**ilgrosso/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eilgrosso/> > > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com
