[openstack-dev] [all] Switching to longer development cycles

Dmitry Tantsur dtantsur at redhat.com
Thu Dec 14 11:13:11 UTC 2017

On 12/13/2017 11:20 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Ed Leafe wrote:
>> On Dec 13, 2017, at 12:13 PM, Tim Bell <tim.bell at cern.ch> wrote:
>>> There is a risk that deployment to production is delayed, and therefore feedback is delayed and the wait for the ‘initial bug fixes before we deploy to prod’ gets longer.
>> There is always a rush at the Feature Freeze point in a cycle to get things in, or they will be delayed for 6 months. With the year-long cycle, now anything missing Feature Freeze will be delayed by a year. The long cycle also means that a lot more time will be spent backporting things to the current release, since people won’t be able to wait a whole year for some improvements.
>> Maybe it’s just the dev in me, but I prefer shorter cycles (CD, anyone?).
> Yes, I'll admit I'm struggling with that part of the proposal too. We
> could use intermediary releases but there would always be a "more
> important" release.
> Is the "rush" at the end of the cycle still a thing those days ? From a
> release management perspective it felt like the pressure was reduced in
> recent cycles, with less and less FFEs. But that may be that PTLs have
> gotten better at denying them, not that the pressure is reduced now that
> we are past the hype peak...

There was quite a pressure all past releases for us. I don't quite expect it to 
end, until people proposing features start being more realistic about timelines.

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list