From: "Livnat Peer" <lpeer(a)redhat.com>
To: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck(a)redhat.com>, board(a)ovirt.org,
devel(a)ovirt.org
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 3:21:26 PM
Subject: Re: 3.5 Time-frame: pushing feature freeze
On 05/28/2014 06:01 PM, Doron Fediuck wrote:
> Hi,
> The current date for feature freeze is May 30.
> Based on today's weekly sync[1], it seems that most teams require
> additional 2 weeks to conclude current work.
>
> Therefore I suggest to set an updated FF milestone for June 15.
>
> If you need more time or think we should not change the current
> date please respond.
>
I think we should prioritize schedule over capacity.
Features which do not make it to FF can wait for the next release.
I think that we should be more careful in the planning phase because it
seems to be a recurring phenomena where people commit for features they
know won't make it to FF - still these features get approved for the
release.
I suggest to adopt a spec review phase, which would become part of the
planning phase, Here is the process (which is similar to some of the
openstack projects' process):
1. For each feature the owner would have to submit a spec file which
includes a description and details of the feature (like what feature
pages should include today - and mostly do not!).
An example would be -
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/neutron-sp...
2. The specs are getting reviews and hopefully approved after they meet
some standards and make sense to add to oVirt.
3. Once a spec is approved it can be a candidate to include in the
release ( at this point the owner should have a good estimation on how
long it is going to take him to implement the proposed spec)
4. The release manager of the version should approve the spec for the
version according to the well known deadlines.
Livnat
> Thanks,
> Doron
>
> [1]
http://ovirt.org/meetings/ovirt/2014/ovirt.2014-05-28-14.01.txt
Livnat,
it seems that most other teams need the extra time based on yesterday's
weekly sync, which included a network representative as well.
So regardless of networking the rest of the version is not ready to
freeze hence this is needed.
As for your suggestion I'm all for a proper discussion as it seems that
the timeline wasn't kept so far and this is the last slip we can allow
without changing GA date.
Doron