On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think a week extension would be good for projects that are under >> review, but I don't think it should be extended for development on >> those features (except to address issues from the review). This would >> also encourage people to push something potentially disruptive to >> ReviewBoard instead of committing at the last minute and having to >> revert it later. That would allow us to review stuff that has been >> ready, but not committed because people have been busy finishing other >> features for the feature freeze and haven't had time to review it yet. >> >> > Just to make sure I'm reading this right: > > you're saying we include things that are in review board as of the > original feature freeze date? And then they get pushed post-feature-freeze > date once their reviews have iterated to acceptance? > > > If I am interpreting Chris' proposal correctly, I like it better than a general one week extension. In addition to the benefits he lists, I think it also makes us much more likely to get 1-commit-per-ticket, which I'm a huge fan of. -- Sean
