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

Ed Leafe ed at leafe.com
Thu Dec 14 14:24:39 UTC 2017

On Dec 14, 2017, at 7:07 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> 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.

In my experience, the longer a patch (or worse, patch series) sits around, the staler it gets. Others are merging changes, so the long-lived patch series has to be constantly rebased. The 20% developer would be spending a greater proportion of her time figuring out how to solve the rebase conflicts instead of just focusing on her code.

I’m not saying that the advantages you mention aren’t real. I’m just pointing out that there are downsides to stretching things out.

-- Ed Leafe

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list