Fwd: F13 Schedule Proposal--please RESPOND

[John Poelstra]

Bill Nottingham said the following on 11/02/2009 10:49 AM Pacific Time:
> John Poelstra (poelstra at redhat.com) said: 
>> I have had a Fedora 13 schedule drafted for several weeks based on the
>> methodology we've established from previous releases.
>> http://poelstra.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-13/f-13-key-tasks.html
> 
> Just as a starting point, this schedule seems rather wrong; historically
> the alpha/beta interim time is a month, roughly. You've scheduled

Your comment that everything is "rather wrong" is not appreciated or a 
helpful way to start this discussion.  I'm not sure what period you 
believe should be a month.  Can you be more specific?

> 6 weeks. It appears you're just adding the amounts we slipped this
> release into the schedule at the points where we slipped this release.

Incorrect assumptions.

> If I was tweaking what you've had posted, beta moves one week later
> relative to the final date, and alpha moves two, if not three weeks later.

I'm following the methodology described here: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle

If what I've created doesn't match this methodology, please point out 
the differences.  I intentionally added a week to the beta testing phase 
to accommodate the creation of a "Test Compose" for the RC which is also 
reflected in the methodology.

If the methodology should be changed we should update the methodology 
and I can generate a new schedule.  One change I would suggest off the 
top is that the Alpha testing duration be reduced to 3 weeks and that 
extra week be given to another part of the schedule.

>> Questions:
>> 1) Are we truly getting value out of the "Halloween/May Day" principle?
> 
> We are getting value of having a predictable release, IMO. If we want
> to shift that slightly, we can, but I don't think moving to a cycle
> where each slip slides all subsequent releases that same amount really
> helps; we end up releasing at a semi-random time each year.
> 
>> 3) With the advent of the test days and ISOs for those events, are we
>> getting any value out of the weekly snapshots during Alpha?  Should we
>> keep doing them?
> 
> No.
> 
>> 4) Add new milestones for Desktop freezes, polish, and "work all done."
> 
> ... how is 'work all done' something that's not already tracked?

I was suggesting milestones for the Desktop team and that "work all 
done" was unclear to the desktop team this release.  It sounded like 
they planned to keep pushing changes in right up until the day of RC.