Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>> On tor, 2010-01-21 at 18:05 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>>> Well, we used to have the idea of a feature freeze ... is that going
>>> to apply at the end of the commitfest?
>>>
>> Feature freeze was used to discourage the submission of very big patches
>> shortly before beta. The commit fest process has IMO alleviated this
>> concern. Beta is still the definite cutoff; and the closer we get to
>> beta, the smaller the acceptable changes become. I think that formula
>> basically applies throughout the entire cycle.
>>
>
> I'm not sure whether you're stating a position that's been agreed to
> by -core or some other group, or just expressing your own opinion, but
> I think feature freeze should be the beginning of the last CommitFest,
> not the end.
>
The commitfest is a useful procedural tool, but I think attempts to turn
it into something more prescriptive are likely to meet significant
resistance. Even the old feature freeze was a bit porous, especially
early on during the freeze, when small, low impact patches were not met
with cries of "you're six days past the deadline".
cheers
andrew