On recent threads on the dev@ list, and discussions off-list, it's pretty
clear that we need to have "cleanup" be a priority for the next release.

How about this for a formal proposal:
   -   The 0.7 release will have issues (both new and on JIRA) be primarily
   focused on bugfixes / cleanup / API-refactoring / etc, with "new
   feature"-work only coming in when it's been pushed off for too long, and is
   close to completion.
   -   All non-"cleanup" items will still be tracked and discussed, but
   JIRA-tickets related to them will be marked 0.8 at the earliest, and they
   won't be committed until 0.7 goes out.
If we're able to wrap this release up cleanly and get quickly moving on to
new features again, maybe we can try this on a more regular basis, with
even releases being feature-work, and odd releases being maintenance and
cleanup (and hopefully having much shorter turnaround time).

What say ye?

  -jake

On Feb 22, 2012, at 7:24 AM, Jake Mannix wrote:

> On recent threads on the dev@ list, and discussions off-list, it's pretty
> clear that we need to have "cleanup" be a priority for the next release.
>
> How about this for a formal proposal:
>
>
>   -   The 0.7 release will have issues (both new and on JIRA) be primarily
>   focused on bugfixes / cleanup / API-refactoring / etc, with "new
>   feature"-work only coming in when it's been pushed off for too long, and is
>   close to completion.
>   -   All non-"cleanup" items will still be tracked and discussed, but
>   JIRA-tickets related to them will be marked 0.8 at the earliest, and they
>   won't be committed until 0.7 goes out.
>

I like the idea.  At a minimum, I think our focus for 0.7 should be on cleanup.  I do know there are some long standing new issues that people worked hard to complete for 0.7 (PCA, for instance) that seem reasonable to add.  On the whole, though, I'd say we shoot for cleaning up and releasing in say the 2-3 mos. time frame.
>
> If we're able to wrap this release up cleanly and get quickly moving on to
> new features again, maybe we can try this on a more regular basis, with
> even releases being feature-work, and odd releases being maintenance and
> cleanup (and hopefully having much shorter turnaround time).
>
> What say ye?
>
>  -jake

Aye say I.

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 22, 2012, at 4:24 AM, Jake Mannix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> If we're able to wrap this release up cleanly and get quickly moving on to
> new features again, maybe we can try this on a more regular basis, with
> even releases being feature-work, and odd releases being maintenance and
> cleanup (and hopefully having much shorter turnaround time).
>
> What say ye?

I say aye.

iPhone'd

On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:35, Ted Dunning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Aye say I.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 22, 2012, at 4:24 AM, Jake Mannix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> If we're able to wrap this release up cleanly and get quickly moving on to
>> new features again, maybe we can try this on a more regular basis, with
>> even releases being feature-work, and odd releases being maintenance and
>> cleanup (and hopefully having much shorter turnaround time).
>>
>> What say ye?

I'll go for aye aye maties, shall we aim for end of May?

On 2/22/12 7:41 AM, Shannon Quinn wrote:
> I say aye.
>
> iPhone'd
>
> On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:35, Ted Dunning<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  wrote:
>
>> Aye say I.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Feb 22, 2012, at 4:24 AM, Jake Mannix<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  wrote:
>>
>>> If we're able to wrap this release up cleanly and get quickly moving on to
>>> new features again, maybe we can try this on a more regular basis, with
>>> even releases being feature-work, and odd releases being maintenance and
>>> cleanup (and hopefully having much shorter turnaround time).
>>>
>>> What say ye?
>