[DISCUSS] Roadmap -> Release plan

[Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>]

Hi all,
waiting for 1.0.0-RC1 to be voted on general@incubator ML, I've spent 
some time with Fabio trying to elaborate the features gathered so far 
for our roadmap; results are available at [1].

My idea is to take this as a starting ground for discussing our actual 
release plan; some constraints / assumptions were taken while reviewing [1]:

  1. Current release (1.0.0 Espressivo) will not get new features, only 
bugfixes
  2. We want to keep labelling release numbers with terms gathered from 
music (originally, the idea behind this was that Syncope "orchestrates" 
users, roles, resources, ...)
  3. The amount of work to be done for each release is roughly the same
  4. We want to keep the release cycle as frequent as possible, but 
still deliver a consistent set of features
  5. Priority was given based on two criteria: first of all, try to 
complete Syncope as IdM, then our own understanding and preferences
  6. Release dates are estimated based on the work done so far by active 
developers: we really hope to get more of these, and that estimates are 
too large

Any feedback is welcome.
Best regards.

[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SYNCOPE/Roadmap

-- 
Francesco Chicchiriccò

ASF Member, Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member
http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/

Re: [DISCUSS] Roadmap -> Release plan

[Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>]

On 30/05/2012 16:44, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
> Hi Francesco,
>
> The release strategy seems reasonable to me, and it's good to have such a
> comprehensive roadmap. I have a slight fear that such a roadmap might be
> seen to be "set in stone" though - if a developer is willing to put in the
> work for feature X scheduled for Q3 2013 to get it done for Q4 2012 for
> example, will this be accommodated in the roadmap accordingly?

As soon as feature X does not depend on other features scheduled for Q3
2013, I do believe that this developer's work is more than welcome :-)
I would also hope that such developer will be sharing his intentions
*before* starting the actual implementation, so that we can still have a
community-driven build.

Moreover, I do think we should keep re-discussing the roadmap (for next
releases) as needed.

In my opinion, we should keep this wiki page updated - and aligned with
JIRA - in order to:
 * provide some general reference and insights about our plans to
(potential) users
 * serve to us as a reference map to know where we are going

Regards.

> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> waiting for 1.0.0-RC1 to be voted on general@incubator ML, I've spent
>> some time with Fabio trying to elaborate the features gathered so far for
>> our roadmap; results are available at [1].
>>
>> My idea is to take this as a starting ground for discussing our actual
>> release plan; some constraints / assumptions were taken while reviewing [1]:
>>
>>  1. Current release (1.0.0 Espressivo) will not get new features, only
>> bugfixes
>>  2. We want to keep labelling release numbers with terms gathered from
>> music (originally, the idea behind this was that Syncope "orchestrates"
>> users, roles, resources, ...)
>>  3. The amount of work to be done for each release is roughly the same
>>  4. We want to keep the release cycle as frequent as possible, but still
>> deliver a consistent set of features
>>  5. Priority was given based on two criteria: first of all, try to
>> complete Syncope as IdM, then our own understanding and preferences
>>  6. Release dates are estimated based on the work done so far by active
>> developers: we really hope to get more of these, and that estimates are too
>> large
>>
>> Any feedback is welcome.
>> Best regards.
>>
>> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SYNCOPE/Roadmap
-- 
Francesco Chicchiriccò

ASF Member, Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member
http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/

Re: [DISCUSS] Roadmap -> Release plan

[Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>]

Hi Francesco,

The release strategy seems reasonable to me, and it's good to have such a
comprehensive roadmap. I have a slight fear that such a roadmap might be
seen to be "set in stone" though - if a developer is willing to put in the
work for feature X scheduled for Q3 2013 to get it done for Q4 2012 for
example, will this be accommodated in the roadmap accordingly?

Colm.

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
> waiting for 1.0.0-RC1 to be voted on general@incubator ML, I've spent
> some time with Fabio trying to elaborate the features gathered so far for
> our roadmap; results are available at [1].
>
> My idea is to take this as a starting ground for discussing our actual
> release plan; some constraints / assumptions were taken while reviewing [1]:
>
>  1. Current release (1.0.0 Espressivo) will not get new features, only
> bugfixes
>  2. We want to keep labelling release numbers with terms gathered from
> music (originally, the idea behind this was that Syncope "orchestrates"
> users, roles, resources, ...)
>  3. The amount of work to be done for each release is roughly the same
>  4. We want to keep the release cycle as frequent as possible, but still
> deliver a consistent set of features
>  5. Priority was given based on two criteria: first of all, try to
> complete Syncope as IdM, then our own understanding and preferences
>  6. Release dates are estimated based on the work done so far by active
> developers: we really hope to get more of these, and that estimates are too
> large
>
> Any feedback is welcome.
> Best regards.
>
> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/SYNCOPE/**Roadmap<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SYNCOPE/Roadmap>
>
> --
> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>
> ASF Member, Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member
> http://people.apache.org/~**ilgrosso/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eilgrosso/>
>
>


-- 
Colm O hEigeartaigh

Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com