How does JFX work get prioritised?
kevin.rushforth at oracle.com
Mon Oct 29 17:41:04 PDT 2012
Richard Bair should answer the more general question you raised.
Daniel Zwolenski wrote:
> Good to know, but I was just using this issue to frame the question:
> what's the process you use to determine what's in or out? When you
> "reconsider" this, who will be doing the reconsidering, and what will
> be the determining factor of whether it is in or out?
> e.g. is each developer or sub-team free to pick their priorities or do
> they come from a marketing team or a high-level management crew? Maybe
> there's a committee that meets once a week, month, whatever? What
> input do the decision makers look at when deciding, are they using
> solid metrics from market research, surveys, community feedback, etc,
> or is it more of a gut-feel thing?
> You mention "lobbying". What form of lobbying? What priority do JIRA
> votes get (traditionally none) vs "private emails", OTN forum posts,
> or feet stamping and generally being annoying on this mailing list
> (that hasn't worked for me though ;) ). Does lobbying from certain
> users (e.g. oracle customers) or types of users (e.g.
> established corporates vs "I'm a developer") get more weight than
> others - if so what's the weighting (how many noisy plebs does it take
> to balance out large corporate)?
> Any chance we could get some insight on any of that?
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Kevin Rushforth
> <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com <mailto:kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>> wrote:
> I'll take the heat for this one. I just bulk removed the "Lombard"
> release for all Feature JIRAs (as opposed to Tweaks) that are not
> part of the list of accepted features for the release, without too
> much thought behind it. One reason for doing this is to not leave
> the false impression that they are being actively worked on, so
> that people can either set their expectations appropriately or
> lobby for it being included.
> Based on your e-mail, the number of votes on this issue, and a
> couple private e-mails I received, it seems like this is something
> we should explicitly reconsider.
> -- Kevin
> Daniel Zwolenski wrote:
> Is it possible for someone from the Oracle JFX team to outline
> how features
> get prioritised for inclusion in a release?
> I've been frustrated at times with things I think I are
> important not
> getting done, and I think a few others have had similar
> experiences. Obviously all of us think our bug/feature is the most
> important thing, and not everything can get done and there has
> to be
> priorities. I think it would be less frustrating though if we
> actually knew
> the process that was used to prioritise issues - who decides,
> and what
> metrics are used as input?
> I noted today for example, that
> which is simply to allow maximising the stage
> programmatically, just got
> bumped so its not part of Java8 and is not part of any foreseeable
> release. I personally don't care about this feature so much,
> but it does
> look like a pretty fundamental, basic thing for a windowing
> toolkit to
> have, so highlights the general point:
> - It was raised as a "critical feature" by Jasper Potts, so
> it doesn't
> seem a case of not being recognised as important within Oracle.
> - It was raised back in 2010 so it doesn't seem a case of
> it coming in
> too late and just not making the cut for the release.
> - Based on comments from Anthony Petrov it seems to be
> already mostly
> implemented and just needs to be hooked in, so I'm assuming
> it's not really
> a big resourcing issue.
> - It's got 28 votes from the community, placing it at #8 in
> the most
> voted list by my reckoning, so there's no lack of community
> interest in the
> issue (3D geometry support has 12 votes for example).
> >From my vantage point, it's difficult to see why a feature
> like this
> wouldn't have been done months ago, let alone be off the road map
> completely, especially when you consider some of the more
> obscure features
> on the roadmap. Confusion over something like this, for me at
> festers into a general distrust in the process, which results in
> frustration around other issues I do consider important (like
> Can this confusion be lessened through some better
> communication? Is it
> possible to explain how, in this case and in general, you guys
> JavaFX work?
More information about the openjfx-dev