How *could* we make it more easy to deliver late-breaking deliverables?

[Colin Walters]

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015, at 12:22 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> 
> Fully agree that making rel-eng monitor this stuff makes no sense and
> doesn't scale.  We need to find a better solution, and I think some
> real project management approach makes sense as one alternative.

I keep circling back to the concept of a staging rel-eng space.

Certainly before any deliverable is being proposed, some functional
prototype of how it's built in a reliable fashion is feature complete.  Then
after that the Change is "promoting" it to be a defined reliable
updated bit.

Let's take the Vagrant box as a concrete example.  Someone
who was joining from outside could very reasonably propose
using Packer:
https://www.packer.io/intro/getting-started/vagrant.html
to make a Fedora vagrant box.

They say "Hey Vagrant is popular enough to be official, let's get
this in rel-eng staging".  So some resources are provisioned to
do this, they get a little bit of space to manage the release.

Then later, a Change is made for this to be official.  At that
point someone from rel-eng looks and would say things like
"Hey this Packer thing completely duplicates the ImageFactory
 work that's already in Koji, can you rework to use that?  And
 kickstart files, etc."