As Karsten said, that was not to increase the budget for releases, which was already done way ago (12k/year IIRC), but how to split that budget among major/minor releases, which seemed was not clear for everyone (though it was for me).
From which bucket do we take the 4k from?
That is a fair and important question, which I can not answer, but only the people behind the projects that already got their budget granted. It is basically up to them to decide how much they can and want to give away from that to distribute back to the major release over-hours. I personally won’t have any bad whatsoever feelings to projects not being able or wanting to give up some of their budget - they got it granted already, so it’s basically their decision without regrets IMO.
How much is then “available” up to the 4k should IMO be given to Karsten and Daniel, and, if there is any remainder, redistributed back to the projects.
I see the poll above (4k/2k/none/whatever) as just the democratic permission to ask for up to that amount from the others - not so much as “exactly that amount is garanteed to be taken from the others”. Maybe some see that differently?
When we agree on the 2k or 4k how do we actually handle future releases and their budgets?
Also what Karsten said - I don’t take this as a measure for future releases, rather as a singular request for compensation on an outlier. So in the future it’s still 5k/3k fixed granted for the release work and anything spent on top has to be requested for compensation from the team.
So it’s basically a decision of the release team how much they want to invest into the release and then the team on how much they think this effort was justified.
In retrospect, it probably would have been more “optimal” if as soon as the work covered by the budget was put into, the team would then have been informed that more work is necessary and if the team agrees to grant more budget for this release. That would at least have avoided the situation of “this much time was already spent uncovered and we ask for some coverage retroactively”.
But then again, it’s not easy and I trust the people enough that they didn’t just senselessly put work into this to profit from and also I see how much work that major release was and think it was important enough to justify that amount (if available).
I probably wouldn’t support much more for a single release though, because rather then spending 10k+ for a single (major) release (which IMO just highlights a process deficit), I’d rather spend 3k for improving the process and then 7k for a more minimal release this time. Hence also my suggestion to grant an ongoing small “on top budget” into the process.