DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] releases scheduling
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2015 21:04:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20440720.NFxuXo1DdD@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA6748156E@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>

2015-12-19 22:58, O'Driscoll, Tim:
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> > 2015-12-19 16:21, Wiles, Keith:
> > > On 12/19/15, 3:47 AM, "Thomas Monjalon" <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> > > >2015-12-19 02:16, Wiles, Keith:
> > > >> On 12/18/15, 6:01 PM, "dev on behalf of Thomas Monjalon" wrote:
> > > >> >2015-12-13 20:22, Thomas Monjalon:
> > > >> >> We need to define the deadlines for the next releases.
> > > >> >> During 2015, we were doing a release every 4 months.
> > > >> >> If we keep the same pace, the next releases would be:
> > > >> >> 	2.3: end of March
> > > >> >> 	2.4: end of July
> > > >> >> 	2.5: end of November
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> However, things move fast and it may be a bit long to wait 4
> > months for
> > > >> >> a feature. That's why I suggest to progressively shorten release
> > terms:
> > > >> >> 	2.3: end of March
> > > >> >> 	2.4: mid July
> > > >> >> 	2.5: end of October
> > > >> >> and continue with a release every 3 months:
> > > >> >> 	2.6: end of January
> > > >> >> 	2.7: end of April
> > > >> >> 	2.8: end of July
> > > >> >> This planning would preserve some of the major holiday periods
> > > >> >> (February, May, August, December).
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> The first period, for the first submission of a feature, was 2
> > months long.
> > > >> >> Then we had 2 other months to discuss, merge and fix.
> > > >> >> We should shorten only the first period.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Anyway, the next deadlines should be unchanged:
> > > >> >> 	- January 31: end of first submission phase
> > > >> >> 	- March 31: release 2.3
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Opinions are welcome.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >It seems everybody agree with this new scheduling.
> > > >> >The web site will be updated accordingly:
> > > >> >http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/web/2015-December/000008.html
[...]
> > > >I add it here again to make it more visible:
> > > >	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/web/2015-December/000008.html
> > > >And I copy-paste here:
> > > >	The release cycles are progressively shorten during 2016.
> > > >	Release 16.04
> > > >		Proposal deadline: January 31
> > > >		Integration deadline: March 10
> > > >		Release: April 7
> > > >	Release 16.07
> > > >		Proposal deadline: May 8
> > > >		Integration deadline: June 16
> > > >		Release: July 18
> > > >	Release 16.11
> > > >		Proposal deadline: August 28
> > > >		Integration deadline: September 30
> > > >		Release: November 2
> > > >	Release 17.02
> > > >		Release: February 1
> > > >	Release 17.05
> > > >		Release: May 2
> > > >	Release 17.08
> > > >		Release: August 1
> > > >	Release 17.11
> > > >		Release: November 2
[...]
> > > Please consider making the months fixed instead of having them move a
> > bit each year.
> > 
> > Yes that's what I considered. The dates are not the same in 2016 and
> > 2017
> > because of the progressive change.
> > But 2017 and 2018 should be identical.
> > And more importantly, these dates should respect the major holidays.
> 
> +1
> 
> I think this is a good compromise. It changes the release dates for 2016 gradually, so it avoids disrupting any existing plans. It also avoids the major holiday periods as much as possible, and gives us a consistent release schedule from 2017 onwards.

So it will be applied and visble on the web site.
Thanks for your comments

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-28 14:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-13 19:22 Thomas Monjalon
2015-12-15 13:37 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2015-12-15 14:24   ` Arnon Warshavsky
2015-12-15 14:42   ` Wiles, Keith
2015-12-15 15:39     ` Jay Rolette
2015-12-15 19:15   ` Dave Neary
2015-12-15 21:15     ` Wiles, Keith
2015-12-15 21:40       ` Vincent JARDIN
2015-12-19  0:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-12-19  2:16   ` Wiles, Keith
2015-12-19  9:47     ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-12-19 16:21       ` Wiles, Keith
2015-12-19 20:13         ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-12-19 22:58           ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2015-12-27 20:04             ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2016-05-12  9:38 Thomas Monjalon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20440720.NFxuXo1DdD@xps13 \
    --to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).