On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:20 PM, MZMcBride <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, it's incredibly frustrating to the point that volunteer developers > have > walked away from MediaWiki code development. This is the "wiki project"; > things are supposed to be fast! When someone makes a patch or a commit and > the best we can say is "it might get looked at this year with a fifty > percent confidence interval," that's not okay. > > Code deployments to the live sites need to happen more often than > quarterly. > There are almost no benefits to such a long gap between deployments and the > detriments are clear. > > Is there a problem with saying hell or high water, we won't go more than a > month without a deployment? I realize Wikimedia is a bit different, but > taking a page out of the rest of the business world's book, you set a > deadline and then it just fucking gets met. No excuses, no questions. The > problem seems to be finding anyone to lay down the damn law. > Sing it, brother! We're getting *some* stuff through quicker within the deployment branches, but not nearly as much as we ought to. Whatever the overall release branching frequency, there's also an update cycle within that in getting fixes & independent features (usually extensions) pushed out to the wild, and that's the cycle that's often most important to users (because that's where their most immediate problems get fixed) & developers (because users are where we get feedback). Fixes need to be hitting production within days at longest, and more features than just UploadWizard and ArticleFeedback should be able to make it out on their own schedule without being forced to wait for a total infrastructure update. -- brion _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
