To say it another way, I would expect that once a roadmap is agreed we would
ensure there was a CEP for every item. I don't know whether every CEP would
necessarily be voted into a roadmap, nor whether every item voted on would have
a CEP before the vote is conducted, and don't have a strongly held position on
either (but think it's probably better they're not intrinsically tied in either
direction).
On 01/03/2021, 12:13, "Benedict Elliott Smith" <bened...@apache.org> wrote:
I guess I meant that I don't foresee roadmap discussions having a hard
requirement of CEP for all goals we might discuss, though it would probably be
expected that many of the biggest proposals would already at least have a
minimal CEP to be filed, you're right.
Certainly if an advanced CEP exists I hadn't meant to exclude it, I more
meant that the CEP process is quite involved and spans the lifetime of the
work, and a roadmap helps the project decide on goals irrespective of a CEP,
and helps resource a CEP early in its lifecycle.
On 01/03/2021, 11:15, "Mick Semb Wever" <m...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I think of a roadmap as a pre-CEP activity for upcoming releases,
items
> thereon beginning the CEP process, …
>
What about having it the other way around? That the roadmap is a
visualisation of the CEPs, i.e. those past initial triage that have
initial
commitment and momentum. A reflective approach of the roadmap, just a
visualisation of existing processes, prevents the adding of a new
process
to the community. It will also incentivise the thoroughness of new CEPs.
The benefit of having the roadmap as a separate manual process pre-CEP
might save us the cost of creating CEPs that get rejected, but I can't
see
that actually being a problem for us.
+1 to having the roadmap, in any form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
