On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 5:10 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri <pkarampu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Do you think it makes sense to do post-mortem of features that didn't > make it to 3.9.0? We have some features that missed deadlines twice as well, > i.e. planned for 3.8.0 and didn't make it and planned for 3.9.0 and didn't > make it. So may be we are adding features to roadmap without thinking things > through? Basically it leads to frustration in the community who are waiting > for these components and they keep moving to next releases. Doing a post-mortem to understand the pieces which went well (so that we can continue doing them); which didn't go well (so that we can learn from those) and which were impediments (so that we can address the topics and remove them) is an useful exercise. > Please let me know your thoughts. Goal is to get better at planning and > deliver the features as planned as much as possible. Native subdirectoy > mounts is in same situation which I was supposed to deliver. > > I have the following questions we need to ask ourselves the following > questions IMO: Incident based post-mortems require a timeline. However, while the need for that might be unnecessary here, the questions are perhaps too specific. Also, it would be good to set up the expectation from the exercise - what would all the inputs lead to? > 1) Did we have approved design before we committed the feature upstream for > 3.9? > 2) Did we allocate time for execution of this feature upstream? > 3) Was the execution derailed by any of the customer issues/important work > in your organizatoin? > 4) Did developers focus on something that is not of priority which could > have derailed the feature's delivery? > 5) Did others in the team suspect the developers are not focusing on things > that are of priority but didn't communicate? > 6) Were there any infra issues that delayed delivery of this > feature(regression failures etc)? > 7) Were there any big delays in reviews of patches? > > Do let us know if you think we should ask more questions here. > > -- > Aravinda & Pranith -- sankarshan mukhopadhyay <https://about.me/sankarshan.mukhopadhyay> _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
