Fedora 13 Go/No-Go Date--no looking back

[John Poelstra]

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

[Eric Christensen]

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

[Mel Chua]

>  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

[John Poelstra]

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

[Paul W. Frields]

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                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug

[John Poelstra]

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

[Paul W. Frields]

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.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug

[Paul W. Frields]

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.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug

[Mike McGrath]

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