[Framework-Team] Re: PLIPs in Trac

[Eric Steele]

On Jun 18, 2009, at 11:09 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:

> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> ...

> I wrote a big reply to Matt, and ditched it. +100 to everything you  
> said. :)
>
> I'd suggest that:
>
> a) We now formally ask PLIP authors to write to the plone-dev list  
> (not this list!) announcing their PLIPs and asking for feedback. We  
> can use a convention like prefixing the subject with [PLIP]. Anyone  
> PLIPs that don't have this degree of commitments should be ignored  
> straight away.
>
> b) At the same time, the FWT can go and unassign the milestone for  
> any PLIP that is obviously a feature request or lacks detail. Just  
> do that with a comment explaining why. If the PLIP gets fleshed out  
> (maybe following a), we can always re-assign it.
>
> c) We communicate a deadline for PLIP evaluation. We'll need to  
> leave a couple of weeks for this discussion/fleshing out to happen,  
> I think. But not too long. Two or maybe three weeks max, I reckon.
>
> d) We get into the habit of sending reminders to plone-dev (and  
> possibly planet.plone.org for the important ones) when deadlines are  
> approaching. I think it needs to be part of the release manager's  
> job to send a "2 week" reminder, a "1 week" reminder and a  
> "tomorrow!!!!" reminder for each milestone date. I know this feels  
> like baby sitting, but trust me - it'll save a lot of gnashing of  
> teeth later.
>
> Finally, we *need* to be better to managing deadlines and dates. I  
> for one have too many calendars and a short memory. It all gets very  
> confusing.
>
> I would suggest that we set up one "Plone Release" calendar on  
> Google Calendar and add every deadline and target release date to  
> this. We then link to this prominently from dev.plone.org and in  
> every FWT communique.
>
> Martin


I have little to add to what Hanno and Martin have stated so well  
here. To me, what shortcomings the Trac-based approach may have are  
trivial enough for me to largely overlook and can be covered through  
some further integration work by the plone.org team and/or better  
documentation of the process. I've been getting a sense of frustration  
from new folks we've let into the system looking to help but are  
getting shot down with "that's a feature request". While that may be  
the case, I really don't want to see these potential contributors  
feeling dismissed. Can we come up with some strong documentation on  
where the leap from feature request to PLIP lies?

I'm sure you'll all get sick of hearing me say it, but this Plone has  
a very short timeline. While all major releases have had to find the  
fine balance of time between discussion, implementation, review, and  
releasing, it's even more of a struggle with this one. We currently  
have a 10 day window scheduled for PLIP discussion and voting. I'm  
inclined to stick to that, with a strong admonition to all involved  
that time required to complete the proposal is just as important a  
consideration as its technical merits. I'm not completely inflexible  
on that timeframe though.

I already have a calendar started. I'll work on getting that filled  
out, published, and publicized ASAP.

Eric