Open Stack

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...

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)