Generally, I think all contributed code should go through the equal review 
procedures and not specially prioritized, unless we are talking about critical 
fixes, but can be decided on a case-by-case basis or whatever the current 
process. I think keeping with release schedule is most important. I would 
rather see GSCO or any other code or feature come in a later release, but 
properly reviewed, tested and documented. 

> 1. Don't let it affect the schedule.  Any GSOC code that is completed early 
> enough to make the cut, get reviewed, and merged is included in 2.3.  
> Otherwise, it waits in the pool for the 2013-03 release along with the rest 
> of the un-merged community code.  

Yes.

> 
> 2. Alter the release schedule to better accommodate the GSOC schedule.

No.

> 
> 3. Shorten the beta period for 2.3 so GSOC projects have a better chance to 
> make the cut.  (Note that pushing the Beta1 date back by any non-trivial 
> amount effectively changes the release date and provides no guarantee GSOC 
> code will still have time to pass through the review/testing/merging phases).

No.

Alexey Lazar
PALS
Information System Developer and Integrator
507-389-2907
http://www.mnpals.org/

On May 24, 2012, at 10:40 , Bill Erickson wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> While discussing the proposed 2.3 release schedule (below) in the IRC dev 
> meeting yesterday, Jeff pointed out that the GSOC code-complete deadline of 
> Aug. 13 will likely put most/all of the GSOC code out of the running for 
> inclusion in Evergreen 2.3 (using the proposed schedule).  The larger 
> question is whether that should affect the Evergreen release schedule, this 
> year and potentially in the future.  The smaller question is, if so, how 
> should it affect the schedule?  I see a couple of options:
> 
> 1. Don't let it affect the schedule.  Any GSOC code that is completed early 
> enough to make the cut, get reviewed, and merged is included in 2.3.  
> Otherwise, it waits in the pool for the 2013-03 release along with the rest 
> of the un-merged community code.  
> 
> 2. Alter the release schedule to better accommodate the GSOC schedule.
> 
> 3. Shorten the beta period for 2.3 so GSOC projects have a better chance to 
> make the cut.  (Note that pushing the Beta1 date back by any non-trivial 
> amount effectively changes the release date and provides no guarantee GSOC 
> code will still have time to pass through the review/testing/merging phases). 
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> -b
> 
> ----------------------
> July 2  : Alpha 1 (as necessary, followed by A2, ...)
> Aug 1   : Beta 1 / feature freeze (as necessary, followed by B2, ...)
> Aug 31  : RC 1 (before US Labor Day holiday)
> Sept 19 : 2.3 General Release
> ----------------------
> 
> -- 
> Bill Erickson
> | Senior Software Developer
> | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source
> | phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
> | email: [email protected]
> | web: http://esilibrary.com 

Reply via email to