Re: Schedule figures

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: This is the correct open venue, though admittedly one that probably not many people know about :). As far as the problem at hand, freezes are meant to be just that IMO, however, events warrant getting things in after the freeze nearly all the time, for example things not installing right :) I firmly advocate a strict freeze policy, basically something like "we only accept items after the freeze if the default installation lights itself on fire, or you're unable to do an installation of various package sets via various methods", with the various methods becoming more and more towards the END of the release process. For Beta/Feature freeze, the situation becomes a little tougher. According to the feature policy, any features for the current release have to be in a testable state by Beta. This leads to people requesting feature-related tagging. I'm pretty sure that I'm being very unreasonable here, but a side of me says "if you don't have your feature in a testable state by Beta *freeze* - we drop the feature". No more tagging just to ensure that features meet the policy (again, I'm very sure that this is an unreasonable position to take - but it does represent the ideal world). This sounds counter-intuitive, I know - but we expect less to work towards the beginning. Towards the end, there are more stringent requirements that we are ready for the world. Admittedly, in a perfect world, everything would be tested for every milestone release that we have, however, we have a distinct lack of QA resources in Fedora - Will is just one person, and while he does have help from others, the time that most of them (including myself) spend is at the moment that we have time available, not necessarily at the time of need :/