On 5/31/11 10:03 AM, Trevor Parscal wrote: > It's my expectation that this will always fluctuate, never reach anything > resembling a stable rhythm, and that whether that's good or bad, that is and > will continue to be reality.
I understand how you feel, but that is unnecessarily pessimistic. A lot of other projects of equal or greater size and complexity manage to release much more frequently. And there are just as many voices tugging in different directions. So we know that the solution exists. We just have not taken the right steps to achieve that solution. > Any ideas? Well, AFAIK our bottleneck is reviewing. I'm unaware of any concrete steps that have been taken to get a scalable reviewing system happening. I'm not saying nothing's been done, it's just that I've never seen anyone say "okay, here's the plan". Maybe this sounds like I'm volunteering for it, and I guess I would, but it seems to me that the current users who can push have to come up with a system that *they* trust. Whatever bright idea I have is going to go down in flames if Tim et al. aren't fully committed to it and adequate sacrifices are made in other areas to adjust to a new system. If pushing more frequently isn't a priority for these users (or they are unable to find the time to fix the current system) then I don't know what to do either. Are we all in deadlock or something? Are the users who can push waiting from some proposals/work from the rest of the community? -- Neil Kandalgaonkar ( <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
