On 08/12/2010 03:03 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 13:19:29 -0500,
Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Since 2006 we've slipped at least 16-18 weeks by my count. That's more
> than half of a full release cycle.
>
> Thoughts?
One thing I have noticed is people landing big changes (such as python and
systemd) that break things for a while, delay a lot of other testing. So
that when the bigger changes get fixed up, other bugs get unhidden with little
time to react.
I'd like to see the big changes land a lot earlier, maybe a month before
the branch, so that by the branch most things should be easily testable.
+1
Perhaps our feature proposals need a better risk assessment. ie. "Will
this change create system-wide impact? Will reverting it be difficult?"
If the answer is yes to either of those questions, we should require
(either):
1. Testing in an external repo until a some stability is demonstrated.
2. Early merge with an early risk assessment / rollback.
Nathaniel