Merge branch 'dm-process-feature-deadlines' into 'master'
Clarify that a feature that isn't in review by the 1st or 3rd doesn't necessarily miss the freeze See merge request gitlab-org/gitlab-ce!16650
This commit is contained in:
commit
d3f42147a3
1 changed files with 27 additions and 3 deletions
30
PROCESS.md
30
PROCESS.md
|
@ -85,7 +85,8 @@ These types of merge requests for the upcoming release need special consideratio
|
|||
and a dedicated team with front-end, back-end, and UX.
|
||||
* **Small features**: any other feature request.
|
||||
|
||||
**Large features** must be with a maintainer **by the 1st**. This means that:
|
||||
It is strongly recommended that **large features** be with a maintainer **by the
|
||||
1st**. This means that:
|
||||
|
||||
* There is a merge request (even if it's WIP).
|
||||
* The person (or people, if it needs a frontend and backend maintainer) who will
|
||||
|
@ -100,14 +101,37 @@ The maintainer can also choose to assign a reviewer to perform an initial
|
|||
review, but this way the maintainer is unlikely to be surprised by receiving an
|
||||
MR later in the cycle.
|
||||
|
||||
**Small features** must be with a reviewer (not necessarily maintainer) **by the
|
||||
3rd**.
|
||||
It is strongly recommended that **small features** be with a reviewer (not
|
||||
necessarily a maintainer) **by the 3rd**.
|
||||
|
||||
Most merge requests from the community do not have a specific release
|
||||
target. However, if one does and falls into either of the above categories, it's
|
||||
the reviewer's responsibility to manage the above communication and assignment
|
||||
on behalf of the community member.
|
||||
|
||||
#### What happens if these deadlines are missed?
|
||||
|
||||
If a small or large feature is _not_ with a maintainer or reviewer by the
|
||||
recommended date, this does _not_ mean that maintainers or reviewers will refuse
|
||||
to review or merge it, or that the feature will definitely not make it in before
|
||||
the feature freeze.
|
||||
|
||||
However, with every day that passes without review, it will become more likely
|
||||
that the feature will slip, because maintainers and reviewers may not have
|
||||
enough time to do a thorough review, and developers may not have enough time to
|
||||
adequately address any feedback that may come back.
|
||||
|
||||
A maintainer or reviewer may also determine that it will not be possible to
|
||||
finish the current scope of the feature in time, but that it is possible to
|
||||
reduce the scope so that something can still ship this month, with the remaining
|
||||
scope moving to the next release. The sooner this decision is made, in
|
||||
conversation with the Product Manager and developer, the more time there is to
|
||||
extract that which is now out of scope, and to finish that which remains in scope.
|
||||
|
||||
For these reasons, it is strongly recommended to follow the guidelines above,
|
||||
to maximize the chances of your feature making it in before the feature freeze,
|
||||
and to prevent any last minute surprises.
|
||||
|
||||
### On the 7th
|
||||
|
||||
Merge requests should still be complete, following the
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue