ability to requirements after TSC approval of the Lithium release plan
toggle quoted message Show quoted text
 I agree with Ed that we did not do a good job of making adopting Karaf KDC at first, but I *do* feel like we eventually got it to the point that it was KDC and it was critical to the release.
(Starting this discussion as it's own thread.)
My worry is that, like Karaf , we will end up with something that every project will really need to do and which can be made KDC, but that wasn't defined in the approved release plan. In that case, it actually may be *less* work for *everyone*, including projects, to meet the new requirement than to not.
Ed, I don't think taking more time to lay out the release plan for Helium would have fixed the Karaf issue. I think that, as in this case, there are likely to be things that we only find are problematic as we progress and explicitly disallowing us from having a way to deal with that is likely a bad idea.
I do think we should:
1.) discourage adding requirements in this way
2.) hold any such added requirements to a higher standard than KDC including:
a.) being KDC
b.) being reasonable in terms of time requirements from projects
c.) encouraging projects to provide *early* feedback about difficulties so the requirements can be adjusted if needed
Along those lines, we are trying to define the integration/test and docs requirements *now*, but I'd also like to keep open the possibility to add a simple requirement that will make the release hugely smoother.
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Ed Warnicke (eaw) <eaw@...> wrote: