Hi Everyone,
Fedora 13, I mean Jesse, and I were just talking on IRC about the scheduling of the final "Go/No-Go" meeting. This is the meeting where all the key engineering teams meet to declare the release GOLD or not.
In the past it has been Jesse's understanding that certain teams need decent lead time to "stop the presses" if our scheduled release date will NOT be met.
For Fedora 13 we have the "Go/No-Go" meeting scheduled for 2010-04-19 (8 days before the public release on 2010-04-27) with the content going to the mirrors on 2010-04-22.
If we were to move the "Go/No-Go" meeting closer to 2010-04-22 by a day or two (say TUES 2010-04-21 or WED 2010-04-20) would that cause problems for any of the teams if we were to declare on one of those dates that we were NOT releasing on the originally scheduled date?
Please reply ASAP as we are trying to finalize the Fedora 13 dates soon.
Thanks, John
On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 15:54 -0800, John Poelstra wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Fedora 13, I mean Jesse, and I were just talking on IRC about the scheduling of the final "Go/No-Go" meeting. This is the meeting where all the key engineering teams meet to declare the release GOLD or not.
In the past it has been Jesse's understanding that certain teams need decent lead time to "stop the presses" if our scheduled release date will NOT be met.
For Fedora 13 we have the "Go/No-Go" meeting scheduled for 2010-04-19 (8 days before the public release on 2010-04-27) with the content going to the mirrors on 2010-04-22.
If we were to move the "Go/No-Go" meeting closer to 2010-04-22 by a day or two (say TUES 2010-04-21 or WED 2010-04-20) would that cause problems for any of the teams if we were to declare on one of those dates that we were NOT releasing on the originally scheduled date?
Please reply ASAP as we are trying to finalize the Fedora 13 dates soon.
Thanks, John
John, Docs is okay with the push. Our products can be short-fused anyway...
Thanks, Eric
If we were to move the "Go/No-Go" meeting closer to 2010-04-22 by a day or two (say TUES 2010-04-21 or WED 2010-04-20) would that cause problems for any of the teams if we were to declare on one of those dates that we were NOT releasing on the originally scheduled date?
Marketing would be fine. By that point in time, we should really have all our deliverables lined up (now that we've got the hang of how a cycle should go) so it's just a matter of getting the nod to pull the lever and push things out.
--Mel
Mel Chua said the following on 11/24/2009 08:01 PM Pacific Time:
If we were to move the "Go/No-Go" meeting closer to 2010-04-22 by a day or two (say TUES 2010-04-21 or WED 2010-04-20) would that cause problems for any of the teams if we were to declare on one of those dates that we were NOT releasing on the originally scheduled date?
Marketing would be fine. By that point in time, we should really have all our deliverables lined up (now that we've got the hang of how a cycle should go) so it's just a matter of getting the nod to pull the lever and push things out.
Thanks for feedback so far. What about with the PR work that Red Hat helps syndicate on our behalf? Would they be okay with six or seven day notice of change of plans?
John
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 08:00:30AM -0800, John Poelstra wrote:
Mel Chua said the following on 11/24/2009 08:01 PM Pacific Time:
If we were to move the "Go/No-Go" meeting closer to 2010-04-22 by a day or two (say TUES 2010-04-21 or WED 2010-04-20) would that cause problems for any of the teams if we were to declare on one of those dates that we were NOT releasing on the originally scheduled date?
Marketing would be fine. By that point in time, we should really have all our deliverables lined up (now that we've got the hang of how a cycle should go) so it's just a matter of getting the nod to pull the lever and push things out.
Thanks for feedback so far. What about with the PR work that Red Hat helps syndicate on our behalf? Would they be okay with six or seven day notice of change of plans?
I've posed just that question to Kara Schiltz in Red Hat, who works PR for Fedora. I may need to ask for the opinions of a few additional people, including the Red Hat web team that runs redhat.com.
The redhat.com web site advertises new Fedora releases for several weeks starting on release day, with Fedora banners and updated material about the Project and the distro. That might need to be taken into account as well, because obviously a delay might put us in conflict with some other front page material. It hasn't happened yet; we've always been able to work out changes in schedule with a minimum of fuss, but I'd just want someone to tell us they'd continue to be flexible in the future. :-)
Paul W. Frields said the following on 12/01/2009 06:02 PM Pacific Time:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 08:00:30AM -0800, John Poelstra wrote:
Mel Chua said the following on 11/24/2009 08:01 PM Pacific Time:
If we were to move the "Go/No-Go" meeting closer to 2010-04-22 by a day or two (say TUES 2010-04-21 or WED 2010-04-20) would that cause problems for any of the teams if we were to declare on one of those dates that we were NOT releasing on the originally scheduled date?
Marketing would be fine. By that point in time, we should really have all our deliverables lined up (now that we've got the hang of how a cycle should go) so it's just a matter of getting the nod to pull the lever and push things out.
Thanks for feedback so far. What about with the PR work that Red Hat helps syndicate on our behalf? Would they be okay with six or seven day notice of change of plans?
I've posed just that question to Kara Schiltz in Red Hat, who works PR for Fedora. I may need to ask for the opinions of a few additional people, including the Red Hat web team that runs redhat.com.
The redhat.com web site advertises new Fedora releases for several weeks starting on release day, with Fedora banners and updated material about the Project and the distro. That might need to be taken into account as well, because obviously a delay might put us in conflict with some other front page material. It hasn't happened yet; we've always been able to work out changes in schedule with a minimum of fuss, but I'd just want someone to tell us they'd continue to be flexible in the future. :-)
Hi Paul,
Any chance you got a reply on this? An answer might help in our discussions this weekend about finalizing the schedule.
Thanks, John
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 05:08:25PM -0500, John Poelstra wrote:
Paul W. Frields said the following on 12/01/2009 06:02 PM Pacific Time:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 08:00:30AM -0800, John Poelstra wrote:
Mel Chua said the following on 11/24/2009 08:01 PM Pacific Time:
If we were to move the "Go/No-Go" meeting closer to 2010-04-22 by a day or two (say TUES 2010-04-21 or WED 2010-04-20) would that cause problems for any of the teams if we were to declare on one of those dates that we were NOT releasing on the originally scheduled date?
Marketing would be fine. By that point in time, we should really have all our deliverables lined up (now that we've got the hang of how a cycle should go) so it's just a matter of getting the nod to pull the lever and push things out.
Thanks for feedback so far. What about with the PR work that Red Hat helps syndicate on our behalf? Would they be okay with six or seven day notice of change of plans?
I've posed just that question to Kara Schiltz in Red Hat, who works PR for Fedora. I may need to ask for the opinions of a few additional people, including the Red Hat web team that runs redhat.com.
The redhat.com web site advertises new Fedora releases for several weeks starting on release day, with Fedora banners and updated material about the Project and the distro. That might need to be taken into account as well, because obviously a delay might put us in conflict with some other front page material. It hasn't happened yet; we've always been able to work out changes in schedule with a minimum of fuss, but I'd just want someone to tell us they'd continue to be flexible in the future. :-)
Hi Paul,
Any chance you got a reply on this? An answer might help in our discussions this weekend about finalizing the schedule.
I sent email to Kara Schiltz re-pinging. I suspect the Red Hat web team may also need to weigh in since the redhat.com front page reflects Fedora release content on release day as well.
On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 07:56:06AM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 05:08:25PM -0500, John Poelstra wrote:
Paul W. Frields said the following on 12/01/2009 06:02 PM Pacific Time:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 08:00:30AM -0800, John Poelstra wrote:
Mel Chua said the following on 11/24/2009 08:01 PM Pacific Time:
If we were to move the "Go/No-Go" meeting closer to 2010-04-22 by a day or two (say TUES 2010-04-21 or WED 2010-04-20) would that cause problems for any of the teams if we were to declare on one of those dates that we were NOT releasing on the originally scheduled date?
Marketing would be fine. By that point in time, we should really have all our deliverables lined up (now that we've got the hang of how a cycle should go) so it's just a matter of getting the nod to pull the lever and push things out.
Thanks for feedback so far. What about with the PR work that Red Hat helps syndicate on our behalf? Would they be okay with six or seven day notice of change of plans?
I've posed just that question to Kara Schiltz in Red Hat, who works PR for Fedora. I may need to ask for the opinions of a few additional people, including the Red Hat web team that runs redhat.com.
The redhat.com web site advertises new Fedora releases for several weeks starting on release day, with Fedora banners and updated material about the Project and the distro. That might need to be taken into account as well, because obviously a delay might put us in conflict with some other front page material. It hasn't happened yet; we've always been able to work out changes in schedule with a minimum of fuss, but I'd just want someone to tell us they'd continue to be flexible in the future. :-)
Hi Paul,
Any chance you got a reply on this? An answer might help in our discussions this weekend about finalizing the schedule.
I sent email to Kara Schiltz re-pinging. I suspect the Red Hat web team may also need to weigh in since the redhat.com front page reflects Fedora release content on release day as well.
Kara confirmed with me that this move would not be a monumental problem for Red Hat's PR efforts. To reiterate, we'd want to be mindful of the Red Hat team that works on the redhat.com web site, where space is typically reserved for us on the week following our release date. In the event of some collision with other Red Hat needs for the redhat.com on or around our new release date, I'd work with that team to find an agreeable solution.
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, John Poelstra wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Fedora 13, I mean Jesse, and I were just talking on IRC about the scheduling of the final "Go/No-Go" meeting. This is the meeting where all the key engineering teams meet to declare the release GOLD or not.
In the past it has been Jesse's understanding that certain teams need decent lead time to "stop the presses" if our scheduled release date will NOT be met.
For Fedora 13 we have the "Go/No-Go" meeting scheduled for 2010-04-19 (8 days before the public release on 2010-04-27) with the content going to the mirrors on 2010-04-22.
If we were to move the "Go/No-Go" meeting closer to 2010-04-22 by a day or two (say TUES 2010-04-21 or WED 2010-04-20) would that cause problems for any of the teams if we were to declare on one of those dates that we were NOT releasing on the originally scheduled date?
Please reply ASAP as we are trying to finalize the Fedora 13 dates soon.
The problems for infrastructure are mostly involved with total frozen time. If we schedule a 2 week freeze, and the slip happens in that time, it becomes a 3 or 4 week freeze. It doesn't cause issues for the release itself but can slow things down in infra. Just mentioning it, I wouldn't think it's a blocker for changing the meeting go/no-go date if there's good reason to move it.
-Mike
logistics@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Eric Christensen -
John Poelstra -
Mel Chua -
Mike McGrath -
Paul W. Frields