Re: [stp-dev] Planning council agenda for Feb 4 meeting

[Antoine Toulme <antoine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It is clear to me as well that we cannot address those items. In particular the ones in the must-dos that want to help with how we communicate with the outside world. We have no bandwidth to implement the N&N item, the plan item is more or less well addressed, the branding item sounds like a WONTFIX to me (at least the "implement our own welcome page" sounds overkill to me). I also won't have the bandwidth to implement capabilities. Actually it's more of a build problem on that one: we need to define a feature with and a feature without capabilities... as far as I understood.

You say this is up to each project to come up with their response. My response is that we can't do it. I thought that was clearer than that when you asked for opinions for the 4th of February call. I don't know if my answer stands for the rest of the project. I welcome any help to help me meet those goals.

I don't think it is safe to participate with the release train if we don't meet those goals, and that's why I discussed with you Oisin about those back in December. I also had the same feedback from Ed who was not too interested into capabilities.

At the time, you told me this would be debated during the next calls of the planning council. Please correct me if that's not what you took away from it.

I also don't think we can take the easy way out: we can't say that the committee is raising the bar too high while expecting people don't follow the must dos. Either we make it, either we don't. If in June, I have to deal with a bunch of angry users looking for the N&N, what do I do ?

So I'm saying we should try to remain as credible as possible. Either we ask the committee to remove those requirements because we can't reach them. Or we get extra help to deal with them. Or we have to drop off the train.

Thanks,

Antoine

On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Oisin Hurley <ohurley@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Sounds like that was either not discussed or not written down in the minutes. So what is the status on those things ? Are we just going to mark them as WONTFIX without any further discussion at the council ?

It's up to the projects to determine their own response to
this. There's a bug in STP build component for this issue,
and when we close it, then there will be a response.

I don't think discussion is on the cards - it seems quite
clear to me the projects here in STP won't be addressing
this. What discussion should we have on the matter?

 --oh