On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:02:32AM +0000, Koushik Das wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us] > > Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 12:36 PM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:02 AM, murali reddy > > <muralimmre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > We should do a health-check of proposed features [1] which are at risk > > > for > > > 4.2 feature freeze before deciding to re-evaluate timelines. > > > > > > > We are supposedly doing time-based release, so we don't care about what > > features make it versus don't. > > 4.1 was also supposed to be a time based one but got delayed due to various > issues. So not sure what would be the right approach here. I think it makes > sense to look at the feature list to see if some of them (individual features > can be voted upon) can be accommodated in 4.2. If there are no such features > then there is no need for extending the cutoff date. >
4.1's *feature freeze* was not extended (with the exception of Javelin merging in at the very end). What delayed us were quality issues... and frankly the "stabilization" period isn't something that I personally consider to be the critical date to hit. It's going to vary, based on what we find during testing. To me, the time-based approach is focused on the feature merge window primarily, and (over time) getting some consistency in our actual release dates. I think we are still learning to work with a feature freeze... we can get better at the tail end after we get better at bringing in only *known good* features into master.
