[Framework-Team] Re: Review process: suggestions, and an offer

Christian Scholz cs at comlounge.net
Thu Feb 7 17:49:26 UTC 2008


Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Christian Scholz wrote:
> (sorry, hit send too soon)
>> To me it's unclear when coding should be happening. In practice it 
>> might be in various ways. You might have a component already because 
>> you needed it and want to get it into the core or you just have an 
>> idea and only want to start coding once people think it's a good idea.
> I think there are two modes:
> 1) Code already exists (e.g. a third party product) and the PLIP 
> submitter wants it improved and integrated into the core. In this case, 
> there's little code to write, except some integration code maybe.
> 2) New functionality or improvement to existing core-only functionality. 
> In this case, I don't think we should expect people to write much code 
> before the PLIP is reviewed and accepted in principle, since otherwise 
> they could be wasting their time.

I think so, too. The question is of course how much time is available 
between PLIP submission and code submission. Maybe for #2 we need some 
slightly different process where people should talk about their ideas a 
bit sooner, e.g. before they write the PLIP or at least somewhat before 
they submit it.

> We have rough timescales, and 3.1 has (had?) a published release date. 
> However, that's no good when deadlines slip. We need to ensure we hit a 
> certain amount of work (code + QA) otherwise our releases suck. The 
> outside world is not going to look kindly on a release that is "on time" 
> to a deadline we arbitrarily set but which is majorly buggy, completely 
> underwhelming feature-wise or shoddily integrated.

I meant more that we should define (and document) the timespans between 
releases are happening so everybody knows when the next chance and 
deadline is. For 3.1 I know now, for the next releases I don't.

>> I also think the process needs to be better documented. As stated 
>> elsewhere I had no idea what submitting a PLIP means and I just 
>> changed the WF state which apparently wasn't the right thing ;-)
>> It would be good to maybe have different documents for the parties 
>> involved what they have to do plus a high level document with the 
>> milestones.
> Personally, I would prefer a single document, which is easier to keep up 
> to date. But we need to do this, definitely. I'm willing to help draft 
> this if Andi and Wichert can join me.

Maybe it should also be easier to find, e.g. at dev.plone.org (at least 
with a link). BTW; dev.plone.org only give a directory listing right 
now, maybe it should redirect to /plone ?

>> And of course this calendar should be in somebody's responsibility 
>> (preferably somebody from the framework team or the release manager).
> +1

(and if people want to use the Google Cal I am happy to hand it over. It 
has some setup in terms of an HTML output via feedburner and might have 
some Pipes for filtering soon, too).

-- Christian

Christian Scholz                         video blog: http://comlounge.tv
COM.lounge                                   blog: http://mrtopf.de/blog
Luetticher Strasse 10                                    Skype: HerrTopf
52064 Aachen                              Homepage: http://comlounge.net
Tel: +49 241 400 730 0                           E-Mail cs at comlounge.net
Fax: +49 241 979 00 850                               IRC: MrTopf, Tao_T

connect with me: http://mrtopf.de/connect

More information about the Framework-Team mailing list