On Thu, Dec 14 2017, Thierry Carrez wrote: > It takes time to get a feature merged (or any significant work done) in > OpenStack. It takes time to get reviews, we need to be careful about not > breaking all our users, etc. If you are a 20% time person, it's just > impossible to get something significant done within the timeframe of a > cycle, which leads to frustration as you have to get your stuff > re-discussed and re-prioritized at the start of the next cycle. > > I'm open to other ways to solve what is perceived by many as an > untenable cadence -- but so far the only suggestion I got on this thread > was that 20% people should really ask their manager to become 80% > people. And I don't see that happening.
Yeah that does not seem realistic. I like the way you state the problem actually: "it's just impossible to get something significant done within the timeframe of a cycle, which leads to frustration as you have to get your stuff re-discussed and re-prioritized at the start of the next cycle". So the first thing that comes to mind is that having a longer release cycle will fix it. However, has anyone tried to understand the reasons why it is hard to impossible to do anything useful in a cycle, other than "it is too short"? -- Julien Danjou ;; Free Software hacker ;; https://julien.danjou.info
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev