From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A26DD5599 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 04:51:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Nov 2016 19:51:24 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,651,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="31769195" Received: from fmsmsx106.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.204]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Nov 2016 19:51:24 -0800 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.70) by FMSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.204) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:51:23 -0800 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.239]) by SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.142]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 11:51:22 +0800 From: "Xu, Qian Q" To: Thomas Monjalon , "Liu, Yong" CC: "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-announce] DPDK 16.11 released Thread-Index: AQHSPfyOErfJmw/adE+mTyr5crrvSaDYwjaAgAB6pwCAA1GRgA== Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 03:51:21 +0000 Message-ID: <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E3925F412@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <3980631.9YyyMl1DK9@xps13> <86228AFD5BCD8E4EBFD2B90117B5E81E6032660B@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <1609004.OL7hRRQnMz@xps13> In-Reply-To: <1609004.OL7hRRQnMz@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-announce] DPDK 16.11 released X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 03:51:26 -0000 It is good that RC1 on Jan.11th is a hard deadline. We also need ensure tha= t RC1 is a complete package with all features. If RC1 is out but missing so= me big features, then the test results on RC1 vs RC2 may have big differenc= e.=20 So, could we ensure that RC1 is a complete feature package, if any feature = missing RC1, then we may postpone the feature to 17.05? Does it make sense?= =20 -----Original Message----- From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:06 PM To: Liu, Yong Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-announce] DPDK 16.11 released Hi and thanks for sharing your time constraints, 2016-11-15 01:46, Liu, Yong: > As prospect for 17.02, our intel validation team have some concern about = the release date. > The official day off for Chinese Sprint Festival holiday will be from 27t= h Jan to 3th Feb. > Most of our members may ask for more days leave either before or after th= e official day off. > From our previous experience, it will take 3~4 weeks to do the full funct= ion and performance test. > If the first candidate release in the middle of Jan, we can do first=20 > round of validation and raise issues to developers. The integration deadline is January 5. So we can target/expect a RC1 on January 11. > And after the holiday, we can keep on the validation process and finish i= n two weeks. > If release date is after Feb, it will be hard for us to cover all cases i= n release window. Yes, we must remind that mid-January is a hard deadline for RC1. Then the release will be in mid-February to make sure you have some time af= ter the holidays. What about Valentine's day? :)