Prioritisation of Performance & Availability issues
Right now it's difficult to get a sense of urgency or prioritsation of Performance & Availability issues when planning releases.
For instance, in the 9.4 Milestone we have currently targetted the following items: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=opened&milestone_title=9.4&label_name[]=Platform&label_name[]=performance
We look to dedicate around 12% (1 full time person) to these issues and it's unlikely that we will be able to get through all issues.
This was recently put on to my radar https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/infrastructure/issues/1810 and I have no sense of it's importance or urgency in relation to those other issues.
I would propose doing something similar to how we deal with security and customer support labels which use a 1-3 grading of severity. Issues labelled availability may not always take priority over performance depending on how frequently or likely they are to occur or if there are valid short-term workarounds for instance.
- Any P1 issues we will look to schedule for the up-coming release and should be considered
Deliverable
- Any P2 issues we should look to address within a reasonable timeframe if not all development bandwidth is saturated by P2's
- Any P3 issues will only be addressed once all P2 issues have been addressed
@DouweM @yorickpeterse @pcarranza @ernstvn What do you think of this? I want to make sure we're not just dedicated development time to "Performance & Availability" but rather being smart about how we do this as right now we really don't have a good set of criteria to make prioritisation decisions on these issues.