On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Alec Warner <anta...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > I think part of Mike's point is that time and time again has proven > that the way to a mans heart^H^H^H^H to get things fixed is to break > them. The aforementioned example of a tracker open for months with no > progress is an example of halted progress. If we waited to fix all > known issues prior to launch, then we would never launch. This is very > common in software development. Some features are v2 features, some > bugs are not worth fixing. Some bugs we will fix with a patch > post-launch; I don't see how this is any different. >
I agree with your point. I'm fine with setting deadlines and such, but my main concern is that the first deadline shouldn't be two days after it is announced. If the announcement were that we have a tracker and some languishing bugs, and we'd like to push to get them closed in two weeks I'd feel differently. Rich
