[Board-public] Re: [Framework-Team] Re: release schedule changes
d.w.morriss at gmail.com
Sat Dec 30 04:56:02 UTC 2006
> Personally, I never liked the separation of infrastructure/UI-focused
> releases, and it was also something that was never voted on or
> accepted as the way to go — it was just suggested. But if there is an
> alternating schedule, 3.0 is definitely the UI release, not the
> infrastructure release. ;)
>> I am thinking we need to be stricter about the alternating
>> infrastructure and UI releases in the future: currently we are still
>> doing both infrastructure and UI in a single release.
> I don't think this will realistically ever happen if we're supposed to
> have releases every 6 months. You can't add infrastructure like
> versioning and ignore the UI aspect.
> That being said, I haven't done my job in making the UI tasks clear to
> the team, nor have I delivered what I hoped in terms of actual work.
> Things have settled down now that I have finally started at Google, so
> I suspect I will be more productive in the near future. I'm still a
> bottleneck on the UI side, something I'm working on resolving (and the
> UI sprint we have planned is a big part of that effort).
I think representing releases as binarily UI focussed or infrastructure
focused does a bit of disservice to past discussions. The idea was more
to have release that focused on new feature alternate with ones that did
the needful and cleaned up accrued engineering debt. The idea that a
release would ignore infrastructure or ui outright is ridiculous; the
suggested structure merely gave a simple guiding principle on which a
release would focus.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 291 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Framework-Team