The WordPress coreCoreCore is the set of software required to run WordPress. The Core Development Team builds WordPress. development team builds WordPress! Follow this site for general updates, status reports, and the occasional code debate. There’s lots of ways to contribute:
Found a bugbugA bug is an error or unexpected result. Performance improvements, code optimization, and are considered enhancements, not defects. After feature freeze, only bugs are dealt with, with regressions (adverse changes from the previous version) being the highest priority.?Create a ticket in the bug tracker.
[Editor’s note: This survey was only answered by 3 people, only 2 of which were on the release squad. It’s useful as seeing three people’s distinct opinion, but not extrapolation.]
This post summarizes the feedback received from the WordPress 6.7 retrospective. Thank you to those who contributed their feedback via the retrospective survey and comments on the post. For ease of reading, feedback has been synthesized. Full feedback is available for review in the anonymized form responses and comments to the original post.
Please remember that the following feedback are suggestions to bear in mind for future releases rather than action items for implementation.
What would you keep?
Aligning Dev Chats to the time where Tech Release leads could attend was useful and should be considered in the future.
Release process.
What would you add?
Future release leads should be announced earlier—prior to the end of the previous release.
More robust testing around new features in conjunction with plugins.
What would you change, reduce, or remove?
The squad was announced too late.
The climate of contributing.
How did the collaboration feel?
This section included ways for one to indicate how much they agreed or disagreed with a statement around collaboration.
Would you like to be part of future release squads?
What is your feedback on the current release squad size?
Takeaways and next steps
One lead felt they and their co-leads were not appropriately respected by a sponsored non-lead and indicated their intent to not volunteer for another lead role without assurances that lead roles are to be respect by non-leads.
Another contributor indicated a general sense that release testing throughout the cycle was less that usual.
Congratulations to all who helped make WordPress 6.7! Now that it has launched, you’re invited to reflect and share your thoughts on the release process and squad to learn, iterate, and improve for future releases.
Whether you led, contributed, tested, followed along—whatever your role, even if you didn’t have one—you are welcome to participate in this retrospective. So please take a moment to complete the form or leave public feedback in the comments below.
Please note: the survey is not anonymous. That’s in case a relevant person wants to reach you for further clarification. But your email address will not be shared publicly, and nobody is going to use it for any other purpose.
The form and comments will be open until January 13, 2025. Shortly thereafter, you’ll see a follow-up post with collected, anonymized results.
Again, thank you for your contributions to 6.7 “Rollins,” and for taking the time to help make future releases even better!
This post summarizes the feedback received from the WordPress 6.5 retrospective. Thank you to those who contributed their feedback via the retrospective survey and comments on the post. For ease of reading, feedback has been synthesized. Full feedback is available for review in the anonymized form responses and comments to the original post.
Please remember that the following feedback are suggestions to bear in mind for future releases rather than action items for implementation.
What would you keep?
More than one Editor tech lead
24-hour Comitter freeze before the release party
Run the release party by release coordinators
What would you add?
A lead dev, specifically identified for each feature project. More lead dev or coreCoreCore is the set of software required to run WordPress. The Core Development Team builds WordPress.committercommitterA developer with commit access. WordPress has five lead developers and four permanent core developers with commit access. Additionally, the project usually has a few guest or component committers - a developer receiving commit access, generally for a single release cycle (sometimes renewed) and/or for a specific component. feedback for feature projects
Transparency of “leadership” decisions.
Increase in our release cadence. Docs lead & design team collaboration increase for Dev notedev noteEach important change in WordPress Core is documented in a developers note, (usually called dev note). Good dev notes generally include a description of the change, the decision that led to this change, and a description of how developers are supposed to work with that change. Dev notes are published on Make/Core blog during the beta phase of WordPress release cycle. Publishing dev notes is particularly important when plugin/theme authors and WordPress developers need to be aware of those changes.In general, all dev notes are compiled into a Field Guide at the beginning of the release candidate phase. & Field GuideField guideThe field guide is a type of blogpost published on Make/Core during the release candidate phase of the WordPress release cycle. The field guide generally lists all the dev notes published during the beta cycle. This guide is linked in the about page of the corresponding version of WordPress, in the release post and in the HelpHub version page.. A field guide can be made simpler as GutenbergGutenbergThe Gutenberg project is the new Editor Interface for WordPress. The editor improves the process and experience of creating new content, making writing rich content much simpler. It uses ‘blocks’ to add richness rather than shortcodes, custom HTML etc. https://wordpress.org/gutenberg/ releases updates posts.
Form the upcoming release squad early. Provide heads-up to selected squad members before x.y Release squad post gets published. Also, Allow them to set the Roadmap.
Improve Gutenberg feature merges into Core. If a feature satisfies the MVPMinimum Viable Product"A minimum viable product (MVP) is a product with just enough features to satisfy early customers, and to provide feedback for future product development." - WikiPedia, include it; half-baked features should wait until they, too, work at the MVP level.
Automate some parts of the Release process to avoid errors & reduce release party time.
What would you change, reduce, or remove?
Sync GB packages more often. Make Gutenberg follow the same rules as TracTracAn open source project by Edgewall Software that serves as a bug tracker and project management tool for WordPress. for commit.
Document Release LeadRelease LeadThe community member ultimately responsible for the Release. role rights. The person should:
Give the squad a clear vision/structure.
Be the final arbiter of what gets included or punted from a release.
In the absence of a release lead, clearly delegate that responsibility to other roles.
Include the Theme Wrangler role in the Squad if major changes will come to themes (and not otherwise).
Publish major feature architecture early, to accommodate changes easily.
Improve the release-process documentation to include communication with other teams. For example:
Notify Theme Wrangler to work on changes that impact Default themes.
Collaborate with Themes and Plugins teams to keep extenders aware of breaking changes and other docs they need to prepare for the release. At the moment, this consists mostly of an email to pluginPluginA plugin is a piece of software containing a group of functions that can be added to a WordPress website. They can extend functionality or add new features to your WordPress websites. WordPress plugins are written in the PHP programming language and integrate seamlessly with WordPress. These can be free in the WordPress.org Plugin Directory https://wordpress.org/plugins/ or can be cost-based plugin from a third-party developers and, lately, one to theme authors,
We need to be better at sticking to feature deadlines for releases. Update Project philosophies to include exception criteria for Release delay.
The “Source of Truth” post that Anne publishes for each release is super helpful. If we can make it a process to publish this on make/core, it will save a lot of duplicated effort. It will also give the Marketing/Media Relations, Docs and Training better information and more time to get the wider ecosystem prepared for new features.
How did the collaboration feel?
This section included ways for one to indicate how much they agreed or disagreed with a statement around collaboration.
Would you like to be part of future release squads?
11.1%: I haven’t been part of the squad but I would like to try in the future.
66.7%: I have been part of a release squad and I will gladly repeat.
0%: I have been part of the release squad but will not repeat in the near future
0%: I haven’t been part of the squad but I would like to try in the future
11.1%: Day job doesn’t allow for the consistent time.
11.1%: I have been part of a release squad and I will repeat, However perhaps in some time.
What is your feedback on the current release squad size?
Takeaways and next steps
Several very long-term contributors mentioned that the current process for adding new editor features diverges significantly from traditional processes, and they found it hard to influence direction before those features incurred predictable consequences.
The fixes they propose echo those of other respondents:
More frequent syncing of the editor package to the wordpress-dev repo
More posts on Make that highlight important discussions on the Gutenberg repo
Contributors across the board would like to see more communication with extenders about new features and breaking changes.
Contributors value the Source of Truth documentation that comes from Anne McCarthy and have come to rely on it.
That said, they would like information about new features even more often, earlier, and in more media.
Contributors would also like more information on the roles of release leads (not just coordinators) and what decisions the lead makes versus what decisions are the purview of the tech leads.
Finally, respondents would like to see updates in the Handbook that specify what issues can legitimately delay a release and that a squad will follow the principle that deadlines are not arbitrary the rest of the time.
Congratulations to all who helped make WordPress 6.5! Now that it has launched, I invite you to reflect and share your thoughts on the release process and squad to learn, iterate, and improve for future releases.
Whether you led, contributed, tested, followed along—whatever your role, even if you didn’t have one—you are welcome to participate in this retrospective. So please take a moment to complete the form or leave public feedback in the comments below.
Please note: the survey is not anonymous. That’s in case a relevant person wants to reach you for further clarification. But your email address will not be shared publicly, and nobody is going to use it for any other purpose.
The form and comments will be open until April 26th, 2024. Shortly thereafter, you’ll see a follow-up post with collected, anonymized results.
Again, thank you for your contributions to 6.5 “Regina,” and for taking the time to help make future releases even better!
This post summarizes the feedback received from the WordPress 6.4 retrospective. Thank you to those who contributed their feedback via the retrospective survey and comments on the post. For ease of reading, feedback has been synthesized. Full feedback is available for review in the anonymized form responses and comments to the original post.
Please remember that the following feedback are suggestions to bear in mind for future releases rather than action items for implementation.
What would you keep?
The Community needs/“wishlist.”
Blogblog(versus network, site) post per new feature or major change, e.g., performance improvements or the HTMLHTMLHyperText Markup Language. The semantic scripting language primarily used for outputting content in web browsers. Tag processor.
Release team formation and announcement during the previous release cycle for easy coordination.
Having a co-lead per release focus to allow for complimentary time-zone coverage.
Weekly health checks.
What would you add?
Additional minor releases between majors.
Iteration on Twenty Twenty-Four for Twenty Twenty-Five to reduce fragmentation.
Earlier merging of stable GutenbergGutenbergThe Gutenberg project is the new Editor Interface for WordPress. The editor improves the process and experience of creating new content, making writing rich content much simpler. It uses ‘blocks’ to add richness rather than shortcodes, custom HTML etc. https://wordpress.org/gutenberg/ features into WordPress trunktrunkA directory in Subversion containing the latest development code in preparation for the next major release cycle. If you are running "trunk", then you are on the latest revision..
Equal focus on old tickets and bugbugA bug is an error or unexpected result. Performance improvements, code optimization, and are considered enhancements, not defects. After feature freeze, only bugs are dealt with, with regressions (adverse changes from the previous version) being the highest priority. fixes with new features.
Feature the Pattern Directory in the BlockBlockBlock is the abstract term used to describe units of markup that, composed together, form the content or layout of a webpage using the WordPress editor. The idea combines concepts of what in the past may have achieved with shortcodes, custom HTML, and embed discovery into a single consistent API and user experience. Editor.
A dedicated session in CoreCoreCore is the set of software required to run WordPress. The Core Development Team builds WordPress. for testing the release.
A focus on cohort involvement for sustained contribution beyond a major releasemajor releaseA release, identified by the first two numbers (3.6), which is the focus of a full release cycle and feature development. WordPress uses decimaling count for major release versions, so 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, and 3.1 are sequential and comparable in scope.’s development cycle.
More underrepresented release squads and opportunities for synchronous meetings in different time zones.
What would you remove?
Underrepresented release squads.
Minimum Core code contribution for Editor Tech role.
Increased documentation and training for new contributors to the release process.
Allow only “blessed tasks,” with enhancements/features that have received a first commit before BetaBetaA pre-release of software that is given out to a large group of users to trial under real conditions. Beta versions have gone through alpha testing in-house and are generally fairly close in look, feel and function to the final product; however, design changes often occur as part of the process. 1 to continue to Beta 2 et al.
How did the collaboration feel?
This section included ways for one to indicate how much they agreed or disagreed with a statement around collaboration.
Would you like to be part of future release squads?
16.7%: I haven’t been part of the squad but I would like to try in the future.
8.3%: I have been part of a release squad and I will gladly repeat.
41.5%: I have been part of a release squad before and will do so again, although maybe not next year.
8.3%: I am reluctant to participate again, but I would be open to it if responsibilities and processes were clearer.
8.3%: Maybe later, I’m not sufficiently experienced yet.
8.3%: I have been part of a release squad and would like to repeat, but unfortunately I don’t have the time for near/midterm future.
Takeaways and next steps
Respondents felt that following the development cycle as a new contributor was challenging.
Future WordPress Contributor Mentorship programs will mirror major releases so new contributors have mentored experience with ample documentation and support to find contribution onboarding opportunities.
The shorter development cycle, while previously requested, felt too short for ample feature development and testing.
6.4 was, for all intents and purposes, a success in bringing underrepresented gender voices, skill sets, and points of view into WordPress’s development cycle. 2024 will not include specific release squads to allow for more broad contributor involvement.
Maintenance will be one focus alongside new features for the WordPress 6.6 release in response to a call for more maintenance in major releases.
Congratulations to all who helped make WordPress 6.4 available! Now that it has been successfully released, I invite all who contributed to reflect and share our thoughts on the release process to learn, iterate, and improve for future releases.
Anyone is welcome to participate in this retrospective, so please take a few moments to complete the form or leave public feedback in the comments below. The survey is not anonymous, allowing for outreach should further clarification be needed; please note that your email address will not be shared or used for any other purpose.
The form and comments will be open until November 30th, 2023, with anonymized results available in a follow-up post in December 2023.
Again, thank you for your contributions to 6.4 “Shirley,” and for taking the time to help make future releases even better!
With WordPress 6.2 released and available to the world, it would be very helpful to this and future release squads if all those who contributed could take the time to reflect and share thoughts on the release process to learn, iterate, and make future releases smoother. ✨
Anyone is welcome to participate in this retro, so please take a few moments to complete the form or leave public feedback in the comments below. The survey is not anonymous, allowing for outreach should further clarification be needed; please note that your email address will not be shared or used for any other purpose.
The form and comments will be open until April 30th, 2023, with anonymized results available in a follow-up post in May 2023.
Thank you, everyone, for your contribution to this release, and thanks in advance for taking the time to help make future releases even better!
Props to @cbringmann, @chanthaboune for the peer review
This post summarizes the feedback received from the WordPress 6.1 retrospective. Due to an error in the form linked in the original retrospective post, the results of the retrospective are shared later than anticipated, and your patience is appreciated.
Thank you to the people who took the time to share their feedback and those who did so publicly on the post itself. To keep this post succinct, some feedback has been consolidated; you can check the anonymized form responses and the comments section in the retrospective announcement for the full feedback.
Please remember that these are just suggestions and things to consider for the future rather than items that will be implemented later.
Weeklies, bugbugA bug is an error or unexpected result. Performance improvements, code optimization, and are considered enhancements, not defects. After feature freeze, only bugs are dealt with, with regressions (adverse changes from the previous version) being the highest priority. scrubs, and editor PR triages.
Having several Editor-related leads.
Focusing on non-editor areas like performance, accessibilityAccessibilityAccessibility (commonly shortened to a11y) refers to the design of products, devices, services, or environments for people with disabilities. The concept of accessible design ensures both “direct access” (i.e. unassisted) and “indirect access” meaning compatibility with a person’s assistive technology (for example, computer screen readers). (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessibility), and developer experience.
The release cycle length, as opposed to the original shorter one proposed.
The product walkthrough continues to be a valued addition.
The less “strict” process than previous releases allowed contributors to work on many things they wouldn’t have had the opportunity to work on otherwise.
Collaboration across different teams seemed to work well.
What would you add?
More transparency in coordination, governance, and decision-making in public spaces.
Improving and automating the backporting of editor features to coreCoreCore is the set of software required to run WordPress. The Core Development Team builds WordPress..
An earlier cut-off for new Editor features and Enhancements to prevent last-minute fixes due to unstable code from GutenbergGutenbergThe Gutenberg project is the new Editor Interface for WordPress. The editor improves the process and experience of creating new content, making writing rich content much simpler. It uses ‘blocks’ to add richness rather than shortcodes, custom HTML etc. https://wordpress.org/gutenberg/.
Backporting from Gutenberg in smaller chunks to reduce the effort necessary to find the exact cause of bugs due to the large, multi-commit PRs.
Requiring any new Editor code to first go through a public release in the Gutenberg pluginPluginA plugin is a piece of software containing a group of functions that can be added to a WordPress website. They can extend functionality or add new features to your WordPress websites. WordPress plugins are written in the PHP programming language and integrate seamlessly with WordPress. These can be free in the WordPress.org Plugin Directory https://wordpress.org/plugins/ or can be cost-based plugin from a third-party before being considered for merging into Core.
Requiring the use of the new “private exports” code for any “experimental” or “unstable” Editor APIs that are consumed by Core.
Making all the data from this Retrospective public.
A more complete and timely roadmap.
Attention to other non-Gutenberg components, and polishing the Gutenberg APIAPIAn API or Application Programming Interface is a software intermediary that allows programs to interact with each other and share data in limited, clearly defined ways..
A more effective way of gathering feedback than the retrospective form allows.
There were 3 RCrelease candidateOne of the final stages in the version release cycle, this version signals the potential to be a final release to the public. Also see alpha (beta). rushed in the last week of release, and the final RC 6 was released a day before the actual release date. The final RC was reverting some changes: in these cases, an extended code freeze would allow sufficient time for the themes and plugins to get their code compatible with WordPress.
An even bigger focus in the performance area.
More people doing code reviews.
Earlier ticketticketCreated for both bug reports and feature development on the bug tracker. scrubbing in the release build cycle to avoid delaying the release parties.
More folks to oversee the Editor tasks/PRs; Gutenberg is too big for even a group of 5-6 folks to oversee and catch every issue completely.
Considering National holidays in Major countries. The auto-update broke some of the sites that used specific plugins during a major EU holiday.
What would you remove?
Work done in non-public channels to avoid making non-sponsored contributors feeling not really valued.
The manual backportbackportA port is when code from one branch (or trunk) is merged into another branch or trunk. Some changes in WordPress point releases are the result of backporting code from trunk to the release branch. process from Gutenberg to Core.
The “Walkthrough”.This started as a “Go, No-go” but failed at its designed purpose to provide a line in the sand for feature inclusion based on a thorough, early review session. This was changed to “Walkthrough” to make it seem like it wasn’t an absolute statement on what will or will not be included in the final release. However, this “Walkthrough” only increases the pressure on contributors to essentially “follow the roadmap” of what is expected by leadership after the Walkthrough is made public. Removing it would let contributors offer an unpressured evaluation of new features before release to determine if they are actually ready for inclusion.
Weekly check-ins.`@`ing every single person on the squad is helpful; a more generic `@channel` call asking for anyone with flags to raise them would be better.
The shift from summarizing updates in meetings to relying on dozens of async updates.
How did the collaboration feel?
This section included ways for one to indicate how much they agreed or disagreed with a statement around collaboration.
Some takeaways and next steps
There were various recurring topics that have experienced changes in the WordPress 6.2 release cycle. Please make sure to add your updated feedback to the 6.2 retrospective!
Most respondents felt the process was not transparent enough, with many decisions being made in private spaces.
The WordPress 6.2 release squad has made an effort to bring as many conversations as possible to the #6-2-release-leads Slack channel.
There are discrepancies around the usefulness of the walkthrough, especially its purpose.
Inefficient weekly check-ins with the release squad.
Based on this early feedback, the 6.2 release cycle saw a shift: release coordinators didn’t pingPingThe act of sending a very small amount of data to an end point. Ping is used in computer science to illicit a response from a target server to test it’s connection. Ping is also a term used by Slack users to @ someone or send them a direct message (DM). Users might say something along the lines of “Ping me when the meeting starts.” individual release leads, and limited to listing the release areas during check-ins.
A more effective way of gathering feedback than the retrospective form allows.
Although there is no indication of what a more effective way of gathering feedback would look like, the 6.2 retrospective includes more open-ended questions.
Requiring the use of the new “private exports” code for any “experimental” or “unstable”.
Thanks to Private and Plugin-only APIs, Experimental APIs in WordPress core have largely been tamed. A follow-up post on this topic will be published here in make/core next week. Stay tuned! EDIT April 17th: the post is live now.
Making all the data from this Retrospective public.
As commented at the intro of this post, here it is 🙂
With WordPress 6.1 out in the world, it would be very helpful to this and future release squads if all those involved in contributing could take some time to reflect and share our thoughts on the release process to learn, iterate, and make future releases smoother. ✨
Anyone is welcome to participate in this retro, so please take a few moments to fill in the form or leave public feedback in the comments below. The survey is not anonymous if I need to reach out for further clarification, but your email address will not be shared or used for any other purpose.
The form and comments will be open until December 15th, 2022. The results will be reviewed and summarized in a follow-up post in this same blogblog(versus network, site) in January 2023.
Thank you, everyone, for your contribution to this release, and thanks in advance for taking the time to help make future releases even better!
This post seeks to summarize the feedback received from the 6.0 retrospective, shared on May 27th. Thank you to the eight people who took the time to share their feedback and to those who also did so publicly on the post itself. To keep the post succinct, some non-actionable feedback has been consolidated.
Please keep in mind that these are just suggestions and things to consider for the future rather than items that will be implemented later.
What would you keep?
Outside of the following, there were repeat mentions of how collaborative, kind, and communicative the squad was as a whole in answering pings, making decisions, and supporting each other.
Early sharing of the feature highlight grid to influence About page, release video, etc.
Weekly check-ins.
Dedicated release channel for coordination.
Redundancy with co-leads in various roles to allow for more focus on details, higher capacity for work, etc.
Lack of heroic efforts and last-minute dashes
Collaborative decision making, e.g. with regard to the WebFonts APIAPIAn API or Application Programming Interface is a software intermediary that allows programs to interact with each other and share data in limited, clearly defined ways.
Structured release parties
What would you add?
More support for Docs & Training resources, matching devs that worked on issues with those writing docs/training.
Clearer documentation around resolving tricky issues during a release and when to bring leadership in.
Consider having apprenticeship roles for release squad roles to create a backup and for the continuity of the project.
A reimagined About page that designers can build directly using blocks.
Improved automations, specifically for the CoreCoreCore is the set of software required to run WordPress. The Core Development Team builds WordPress. Editor Lead role.
Release squad should be picked as early in the release process as possible to allow time to prepare.
Consider adding documentation lead role for End User documentation
Improve process for identifying items that need dev notesdev noteEach important change in WordPress Core is documented in a developers note, (usually called dev note). Good dev notes generally include a description of the change, the decision that led to this change, and a description of how developers are supposed to work with that change. Dev notes are published on Make/Core blog during the beta phase of WordPress release cycle. Publishing dev notes is particularly important when plugin/theme authors and WordPress developers need to be aware of those changes.In general, all dev notes are compiled into a Field Guide at the beginning of the release candidate phase., including labeling of PRs that need dev notes, considering multiple types of flags (DevNotedev noteEach important change in WordPress Core is documented in a developers note, (usually called dev note). Good dev notes generally include a description of the change, the decision that led to this change, and a description of how developers are supposed to work with that change. Dev notes are published on Make/Core blog during the beta phase of WordPress release cycle. Publishing dev notes is particularly important when plugin/theme authors and WordPress developers need to be aware of those changes.In general, all dev notes are compiled into a Field Guide at the beginning of the release candidate phase. / MiscDevNote / Field guideField guideThe field guide is a type of blogpost published on Make/Core during the release candidate phase of the WordPress release cycle. The field guide generally lists all the dev notes published during the beta cycle. This guide is linked in the about page of the corresponding version of WordPress, in the release post and in the HelpHub version page.), ensuring documentation is in place for what needs dev notes, and implementing automation to collect all items.
Checklist for each member of the squad at each release phase for improved coordination.
What would you remove?
Confusion/concerns around the Webfonts API situation.
Confusion around the initial betaBetaA pre-release of software that is given out to a large group of users to trial under real conditions. Beta versions have gone through alpha testing in-house and are generally fairly close in look, feel and function to the final product; however, design changes often occur as part of the process. 1 post and what role everyone played. This was very quickly resolved.
Backporting months worth of GutenbergGutenbergThe Gutenberg project is the new Editor Interface for WordPress. The editor improves the process and experience of creating new content, making writing rich content much simpler. It uses ‘blocks’ to add richness rather than shortcodes, custom HTML etc. https://wordpress.org/gutenberg/PHPPHPThe web scripting language in which WordPress is primarily architected. WordPress requires PHP 7.4 or higher changes before the release.
Lack of decisions and process around stabilizing and introducing experimental APIs, leading to a backlog.
Improving the process of introducing, stabilizing, and phasing.
Secrecy around jazzer leading to a lot of complexity around release time.
Too many places for tracking documentation updates from the docs team.
Complicated process for dev notes, including recommendations to stop using comments on the GitHubGitHubGitHub is a website that offers online implementation of git repositories that can easily be shared, copied and modified by other developers. Public repositories are free to host, private repositories require a paid subscription. GitHub introduced the concept of the ‘pull request’ where code changes done in branches by contributors can be reviewed and discussed before being merged be the repository owner. https://github.com/ DevNote tracking issue for collecting all dev notes and change deadline to Beta 1 to give docs team more time.
Implementing a feature freeze in Gutenberg a week earlier to leave more room for integration with WordPress Core and reduce the length of beta releases.
Share more marcoms around the behind the scenes work with performance and accessibilityAccessibilityAccessibility (commonly shortened to a11y) refers to the design of products, devices, services, or environments for people with disabilities. The concept of accessible design ensures both “direct access” (i.e. unassisted) and “indirect access” meaning compatibility with a person’s assistive technology (for example, computer screen readers). (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessibility) so the UIUIUser interface changes aren’t over indexed on messaging wise.
How did the collaboration feel?
This section included ways for one to indicate how much they agreed or disagreed with a statement around collaboration.
Collaborating on this release was easy results
Collaborating on this release was enjoyable results
Collaborating on this release was efficient results
Collaborating on this release was well organized results
The release process was transparent and easy to follow
Would you like to be a part of future squads?
87.5% of people said “I have been part of the release squad and I will gladly repeat”. 12.5% of people said “I haven’t been part of the squad but I would like to try in the future”.
Next Steps
At a high level, a few discussions and follows up have already occurred that others can participate in:
A follow up post was done since the retrospective sharing improvements and automations for the Core Editor release role in light of the experience of those this release cycle.
An open discussion is underway around how best to backportbackportA port is when code from one branch (or trunk) is merged into another branch or trunk. Some changes in WordPress point releases are the result of backporting code from trunk to the release branch. PHP changes.
Outside of the above, it’s clear that there are some process improvements particularly around documentation to consider including a role for End User documentation, changing the way documentation updates are tracked across multiple places, and the way in which dev notes are wrangled.
If you are interested in being a part of 6.1’s release squad and working to improve the experience, please share in the comments of the 6.1 planning post.
You must be logged in to post a comment.