[Pharo-project] Schedule slippage
Can we do something about the way schedule slippage is handled? There is a lot of feature creep, and we are taking too small slippages. Based on yesterdays weather, 1.0 is not going to be released in May 2009. Issues were closed after on average 30 days, 48% within a week, but 10% took 85 days or longer. Of the new,started,accepted, fixed issues for 1.0 40% is 280 days old. Stephan
Hi Stephan, Thanks for the stats. How did you produce them? You are right that we have feature creep (like closures, which were planned for 1.1) and many issues have been open for quite a while. One way to alleviate the problem is if more people help. There is work for everybody. Looking forward to your contributions ;) Adrian ___________________ http://www.adrian-lienhard.ch/ On Apr 8, 2009, at 14:13 , stephan@stack.nl wrote:
Can we do something about the way schedule slippage is handled? There is a lot of feature creep, and we are taking too small slippages.
Based on yesterdays weather, 1.0 is not going to be released in May 2009.
Issues were closed after on average 30 days, 48% within a week, but 10% took 85 days or longer. Of the new,started,accepted, fixed issues for 1.0 40% is 280 days old.
Stephan
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
I would like to get involved in getting 1.0 shipped, but am not sure where to start. Are there some guidelines available somewhere? On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 08:33, Adrian Lienhard <adi@netstyle.ch> wrote:
Hi Stephan,
Thanks for the stats. How did you produce them?
You are right that we have feature creep (like closures, which were planned for 1.1) and many issues have been open for quite a while. One way to alleviate the problem is if more people help. There is work for everybody.
Looking forward to your contributions ;) Adrian ___________________ http://www.adrian-lienhard.ch/
On Apr 8, 2009, at 14:13 , stephan@stack.nl wrote:
Can we do something about the way schedule slippage is handled? There is a lot of feature creep, and we are taking too small slippages.
Based on yesterdays weather, 1.0 is not going to be released in May 2009.
Issues were closed after on average 30 days, 48% within a week, but 10% took 85 days or longer. Of the new,started,accepted, fixed issues for 1.0 Â 40% is 280 days old.
Stephan
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- -JT
Great! First please sign the license agreement if not already done: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/ListOfOkCommitters Second, have a look at open issues tagged for milestone 1.0: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/list?can=2&q=milestone:1.0 Third, check out how to contribute changes: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/HowToContribute And please don't hesitate to ask questions on the mailing list. Thanks, Adrian On Apr 8, 2009, at 14:58 , John Toohey wrote:
I would like to get involved in getting 1.0 shipped, but am not sure where to start. Are there some guidelines available somewhere?
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 08:33, Adrian Lienhard <adi@netstyle.ch> wrote:
Hi Stephan,
Thanks for the stats. How did you produce them?
You are right that we have feature creep (like closures, which were planned for 1.1) and many issues have been open for quite a while. One way to alleviate the problem is if more people help. There is work for everybody.
Looking forward to your contributions ;) Adrian ___________________ http://www.adrian-lienhard.ch/
On Apr 8, 2009, at 14:13 , stephan@stack.nl wrote:
Can we do something about the way schedule slippage is handled? There is a lot of feature creep, and we are taking too small slippages.
Based on yesterdays weather, 1.0 is not going to be released in May 2009.
Issues were closed after on average 30 days, 48% within a week, but 10% took 85 days or longer. Of the new,started,accepted, fixed issues for 1.0 40% is 280 days old.
Stephan
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- -JT
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
We know. The problem is that we do not want to let code rot because we do not have the work load to deal with it. For closure the more we waited the more it becomes a problem and painful. We decided that we will include the event cleaning made by mike. After the large part is the MIT cleaning. Now please join and help fixing the pending points.
Can we do something about the way schedule slippage is handled? There is a lot of feature creep, and we are taking too small slippages.
Based on yesterdays weather, 1.0 is not going to be released in May 2009.
Issues were closed after on average 30 days, 48% within a week, but 10% took 85 days or longer. Of the new,started,accepted, fixed issues for 1.0 40% is 280 days old.
Stephan
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Stef, Feature creep is always a problem, at least for good projects - junk can always be released on a schedule :) Among many other items, you have tackled closures, which is a good thing. Given the choice, I would probably do underscores in 1.0 (they hit home pretty firmly). While 1.0 is "late," there are now monthly developer and web images, the VMs are easy to find, and the system is improving. As long as the system is getting better, (relatively) stable and functional images continue to be offered along the way, and the development schedule makes good sense (I think it does), exactly what you choose to call 1.0 is not of great importance. Bill -----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Stéphane Ducasse Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 9:18 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Schedule slippage We know. The problem is that we do not want to let code rot because we do not have the work load to deal with it. For closure the more we waited the more it becomes a problem and painful. We decided that we will include the event cleaning made by mike. After the large part is the MIT cleaning. Now please join and help fixing the pending points.
Can we do something about the way schedule slippage is handled? There is a lot of feature creep, and we are taking too small slippages.
Based on yesterdays weather, 1.0 is not going to be released in May 2009.
Issues were closed after on average 30 days, 48% within a week, but 10% took 85 days or longer. Of the new,started,accepted, fixed issues for 1.0 40% is 280 days old.
Stephan
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
participants (5)
-
Adrian Lienhard -
John Toohey -
Schwab,Wilhelm K -
stephan＠stack.nl -
Stéphane Ducasse