Open Stack

Zane Bitter wrote:
> [...] Honestly, it
> sounds like the kind of thing you come up with when you've given up.

I tend to agree with that... I think healthy projects should naturally 
come up with bursts of feature addition and bursts of repaying technical 
debt. That is why I prefer not to be too prescriptive here.

If some people are under the impression that pausing feature addition in 
order to focus on stability is discouraged, we should fix that (and I 
think this thread is a great way of making it clearer). But I would be 
reluctant to start standardizing what a "stabilization period" is, or 
starting to impose them. As a lot of people said, ideally you would add 
features and repay technical debt continuously. Imposing specific 
periods of stabilization prevents reaching that ideal state.

So in summary: yes to expressing that it is fine to have them, no to 
being more prescriptive about them.

Regards,

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)