Anaconda is totally trashing the F18 schedule (was Re: f18: how to install into a LVM partitions (or RAID))

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 10/31/2012 05:59 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 10/31/2012 09:56 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> * Jesse Keating, Jeremy Katz, and others who helped shape the current 
>> policy
>>    and theory of our release schedule felt that the 6 month release 
>> cycle was
>>    fine but that certain features were going to take longer to develop.
>>    Those would need to be developed and not enter into Fedora until 
>> they were
>>    close enough that they could be completed during that cycle.
>>    - No matter what we do to try and increase the development cycle 
>> within
>>      a release, there's always going to be issues that take longer 
>> than the
>>      release that we need to deal with.  Perhaps, we just need to be 
>> better
>>      about making people follow this model.
>
> I'm not entirely sure what I felt then, but I'm certainly open to a 
> longer release cycle.  In fact I'm very much in favor of one, one that 
> puts more time between "feature complete" and the actual alpha 
> release.  All too often we see features crash land right at the 
> deadline, and any software that has to integrate across a lot of 
> pieces (like anaconda) gets stuck trying to account for all these 
> changes in a very limited time frame, only to be hindered quickly by a 
> freeze process.
>
> I think we need to give developers more time for feature integration 
> after the feature freeze.
>

We ( QA community ) would benefit from a longer release cycle since we 
need more time to properly test "features" and other vital components 
and arguably the QA part of an feature should FESCO delegate to QA 
community to oversee and handle...

JBG