**tchay** wrote:

> > To the first document which has its origins in the SVN days, the first stop
> > with Howie Fung and his product management team. To my knowledge the only
> > person asked was a Dan Garry, and not as a first stop on anything. 
> 
> Dan was cc'd by Greg in comment 13. I wasn't aware that Platform and/or
> Features were supposed to be in the loop so I never bothered to do it.

It's unfortunate. Dan is new and is not really in a position to speak for product, and I don't think that was the intent of comment 13 to make him make a call.

The implication of Platform or Features is in the later stage of code review for deployment. There was a time that Sumana would manage that using 20% time volunteered by Features, but that was over a year ago. :-( Since then commitment to maintain deployed extensions has fallen through the crack between Platform and Features.

> Correct. I had spoken with Greg a few days earlier about emailing wikitech-l
> /
> Aaron / Tim for the architecture review, and he recommended that I wait for
> your comments ;-)

Oh, well then why was it added to the deploy calendar? Can we remove it backand wait for comments to make sure it's okay to deploy before adding it to the lsit of things to be deployed? As it stands now, my position is I'm okay with it because Ori is okay with helping you support and monitor it for issues that might crop up like comment 37 above.

> > The second document is newly written by Platform not vetted by anyone in
> > Features.
> 
> For someone outside of the WMF who is trying to get an extension deployed,
> the
> distinction between Platform and Features isn't very clear, nor really
> important. Was VipsScaler (also written by a volunteer) handled by Features?

No, and in earlier incarnations of the queue, I think [[mw:VipsScaler]] was linked. Development on it was started in 2011, I think multimedia team (originally a Features team, now in Platform) deployed it. That team is obviously committed to maintain. :-)

> All we really want is our code deployed :P

Totally understandable. :-)


> The checklist is fine, it just seems like its missing one step according to
> you
> (notify Features and/or Platform teams).

I'm okay with clarifying that a design review means a product design review and PM signoff and adding that a plan for engineering, product, and design maintenance needs to be in place going forward (beyond simply bugzilla).