#1236 Change process for F21/Fedora.Next
Closed None Opened 5 years ago by jreznik.

Fedora 21/Fedora.Next is now moving from PRD creation phase to scoping/planning phase. Next step should be to transfer product requirements from PRD into Change proposals to make F21 scoping easier and to make Fedora.Next more trackable (as bugs are created from Change pages).

A few new fields suggested for Change template:
product/WG
if the Change is blocking Fedora.next deliverable in F21 or not

Some Changes were already approved for F21 async (and I did not announce other Changes for in case FESCo would like to make changes in process) but I prefer formal Change submissions especially tight to Fedora.Next and next Fedora.

As current goal is still to have August release, submission deadline should be set in the end of March/beginning April. Maybe earlier date could help us scope the release/first Fedora.next release. It would be nice if not only Products requirement would go though the Change process, but I'd like to see QA/releng/websites other teams to be included. Based on results of scoping, we can work on final schedule (we're probably already slipping a bit but...). Also we could ask WGs and other teams to start working on.

Are were any requests from FESCo and WGs regarding current process? Initially, it was designed with SIGs governance in mind, restricted a bit in the end by FESCo. Do we want to allow WGs to govern Self Contained changes? Or FESCo is still going to be the last party to sign Change process results?

I don't have any particular ideas as I think the submission process worked pretty well in previous releases, especially announcements part was accepted very well by community. I talked to a few folks, mostly they see problems in stricter enforcement of contingency plans but it's a bit out of scope of the process itself. With QA automation in place for F21+, I expect we can see more QA involvement in Changes verification.


A point of clarification: The current goal is not to have a release by August. The schedule is phrased as we won't do a release before August, but there is no actual release date set. The entire point of collecting the changes from the WGs is to evaluate them and set a reasonable release date based on that data.

Replying to [comment:1 jwboyer]:

A point of clarification: The current goal is not to have a release by August. The schedule is phrased as we won't do a release before August, but there is no actual release date set. The entire point of collecting the changes from the WGs is to evaluate them and set a reasonable release date based on that data.

I use August as base point to take a look where we are/we should be to make release. It's definitely not anything set, it just make things easier to do initial planning (a bit chicken egg problem we talked several times about). Otherwise we said the same - F21 schedule will be based on the scope of accepted Change proposals.

  • AGREED: Open up F21 for ordinary Change proposals now, and continue the conversation about adapting the process for .next in the mean time. (+6, -0, 0:0) (t8m, 19:42:46)

Please if you have concrete proposals on the Change process for Fedora.next related Changes that can be voted upon, add them to this ticket and add back the meeting keyword.

As Change Proposal Submission deadline I propose April 1st - it gives WGs/other teams one month to transfer Technical Specifications (March 3rd deadline as set by FESCo) to Change Proposals and allows early F21 scoping.

Replying to [comment:5 jreznik]:

As Change Proposal Submission deadline I propose April 1st

We don't have a schedule yet, so "not earlier than April 1st"?

Replying to [comment:6 mitr]:

Replying to [comment:5 jreznik]:

As Change Proposal Submission deadline I propose April 1st

We don't have a schedule yet, so "not earlier than April 1st"?

Well, this should drive schedule, so we will need some deadline we can create schedule at and usually this deadline was the last pre-no-earlier one. But I can try to announce it without the need for specific date and ask people to submit changes asap (and as things are going to change, less barriers for proposals = better).

I take it this can be closed?

If there is still something to do here, please reopen...

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata