From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 958D5A0C45;
	Fri, 19 Nov 2021 14:48:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 251BE40143;
	Fri, 19 Nov 2021 14:48:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com
 (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7802940140
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 14:48:49 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com;
 s=mimecast20190719; t=1637329728;
 h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
 to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
 bh=r6HWSTGfS7tgdXAJ6wwres0p3jAc7EjOX149cWa7U8c=;
 b=PAX1yhgJ2AM+MUYZJKL4sn3FG7b1LHPA1peji1/MkOVA3nOxicLLje6uPNFcU8IAEkxctc
 qB9PLOZ0zQGIZCv/6W2FtuFB+hq0Whf1KMKJhuJ8pAvF4hnrxOoIPQLpqhen4zh0jj5cK9
 JUv3J+br8bjfb+uyHMtoZvugWTiDw0g=
Received: from mail-lf1-f69.google.com (mail-lf1-f69.google.com
 [209.85.167.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS
 (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id
 us-mta-585-qD8LhOzIOE6AaeY1QAYYsA-1; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 08:48:47 -0500
X-MC-Unique: qD8LhOzIOE6AaeY1QAYYsA-1
Received: by mail-lf1-f69.google.com with SMTP id
 u20-20020a056512129400b0040373ffc60bso6618982lfs.15
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 05:48:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=r6HWSTGfS7tgdXAJ6wwres0p3jAc7EjOX149cWa7U8c=;
 b=8EAfGYutNg5loEU+5JfxEXn4R01kEkUtU6nGbfJUJZmqHKLN/YexuUSEbsyL4SC1j3
 z7jgzI7WDUuXKK1rAJGwkmGK/JNs/pe3pjHwshl2mKOLSh6GuoatY2YsCB2M1buPY0IC
 m1GRILkPoYdTm5xDQcGgUGomBhmtv4YZJnG1WkhmF7uRAN4vIQ373E/lXPpMoWPZvLq+
 cp9VaVBhsYDNDbkcd2hM3x1JjXF5oSXXAfH6SM6jHI45FEleezaN4cQKr334gCtPXstn
 TSpHGd+Hj7dGrUkkBMMoh+aF+AVOdpPriVAwuY3Md/R9FVGXwoeX6z+3yOsHPOvmmx41
 DqzQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533aOx9HZf9L+ubOqrK8JkvQLpE51ehJLoZQoCIukfoY7WSQSJHM
 oqJveckZA9tKSs3KI545gdPyauANrd71H2HXTkTDnrwTpkNzRmpUonzN+xuTTDqDlnJx7jUmcCB
 k7zdhIB2+vYnoj4rbh/E=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5e8f:: with SMTP id b15mr33281596lfq.252.1637329726033; 
 Fri, 19 Nov 2021 05:48:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyTXrLU/vkSfHGPA8w5fastjm/0+lO2WvfsWF/LBISLOOL08LO5OaQV/MzzG8cLau0NLGxOxlmuKRv9LKTnfZ0=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5e8f:: with SMTP id b15mr33281531lfq.252.1637329725687; 
 Fri, 19 Nov 2021 05:48:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5786413.XMpytKYiJR@thomas>
 <4b5ad9da-585d-37ef-198c-6c4e6d6ad9aa@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4b5ad9da-585d-37ef-198c-6c4e6d6ad9aa@redhat.com>
From: Flavio Leitner <fbl@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 10:48:34 -0300
Message-ID: <CAGvBXKdfeGak+_Jfx1GfGh8N7WP3jCpnKQMx2NiBfLpOoP5Kww@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: release schedule change proposal
To: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, dev@dpdk.org, users@dpdk.org, 
 David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, 
 andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru, qi.z.zhang@intel.com, jerinj@marvell.com, 
 rasland@nvidia.com, Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>,
 gakhil@marvell.com, Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>, "Richardson,
 Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, mdr@ashroe.eu, 
 konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, olivier.matz@6wind.com, 
 honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com, hemant.agrawal@nxp.com, 
 Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>, ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com, 
 Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org>, Ian Stokes <ian.stokes@intel.com>, 
 ovs-discuss <ovs-discuss@openvswitch.org>,
 Timothy Redaelli <tredaell@redhat.com>
Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com;
 auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=fleitner@redhat.com
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ae217605d1248863"
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org

--000000000000ae217605d1248863
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Thanks Kevin for bringing this up.
See below.

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 1:06 PM Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 15/11/2021 14:58, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > For the last 5 years, DPDK was doing 4 releases per year,
> > in February, May, August and November (the LTS one):
> >       .02   .05   .08   .11 (LTS)
> >
> > This schedule has multiple issues:
> >       - clash with China's Spring Festival
> >       - too many rushes, impacting maintainers & testers
> >       - not much buffer, impacting proposal period
> >
> > I propose to switch to a new schedule with 3 releases per year:
> >       .03      .07      .11 (LTS)
> >
> > New LTS branch would start at the same time of the year as before.
> > There would be one less intermediate release during spring/summer:
> > .05 and .08 intermediate releases would become a single .07.
> > I think it has almost no impact for the users.
> > This change could be done starting next year.
> >
> > In details, this is how we could extend some milestones:
> >
> >       ideal schedule so far (in 13 weeks):
> >               proposal deadline: 4
> >               rc1 - API freeze: 5
> >               rc2 - PMD features freeze: 2
> >               rc3 - app features freeze: 1
> >               rc4 - last chance to fix: 1
> >               release: 0
> >
> >       proposed schedule (in 17 weeks):
> >               proposal deadline: 4
> >               rc1 - API freeze: 7
> >               rc2 - PMD features freeze: 3
> >               rc3 - app features freeze: 1
> >               rc4 - more fixes: 1
> >               rc5 - last chance buffer: 1
> >               release: 0
> >
> > Opinions?
> >
> >
>
> Someone else might comment if they spot something, but to me looks ok
> for RH distro and OVS project.
>

That is my impression as well.


>
> RH distro is also using DPDK .11 who's release date is not changing.
> (+cc Timothy/Flavio)
>

My concern is if patches would get delayed to be merged because of this
change, but I don't think that will be the case.


> For OVS project, it only integrates DPDK .11 release too and aims to do
> that by EOY to make the next OVS release. DPDK stable releases are
> integrated into older OVS branches when available. I don't think older
> OVS branch releases have a strict release schedule and having the latest
> stable DPDK release is not a blocker anyway. (+cc Ilya/Ian/ovs-discuss)
>

I agree.

fbl

--000000000000ae217605d1248863
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Thanks Kevin for bringing this up.</div><div>See belo=
w.</div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr=
">On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 1:06 PM Kevin Traynor &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ktray=
nor@redhat.com">ktraynor@redhat.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid =
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On 15/11/2021 14:58, Thomas Monjalon wro=
te:<br>
&gt; For the last 5 years, DPDK was doing 4 releases per year,<br>
&gt; in February, May, August and November (the LTS one):<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0.02=C2=A0 =C2=A0.05=C2=A0 =C2=A0.08=C2=A0 =
=C2=A0.11 (LTS)<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; This schedule has multiple issues:<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0- clash with China&#39;s Spring Festival<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0- too many rushes, impacting maintainers &am=
p; testers<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0- not much buffer, impacting proposal period=
<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; I propose to switch to a new schedule with 3 releases per year:<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0.03=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 .07=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 .11 (LTS)<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; New LTS branch would start at the same time of the year as before.<br>
&gt; There would be one less intermediate release during spring/summer:<br>
&gt; .05 and .08 intermediate releases would become a single .07.<br>
&gt; I think it has almost no impact for the users.<br>
&gt; This change could be done starting next year.<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; In details, this is how we could extend some milestones:<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0ideal schedule so far (in 13 weeks):<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0proposal deadlin=
e: 4<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rc1 - API freeze=
: 5<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rc2 - PMD featur=
es freeze: 2<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rc3 - app featur=
es freeze: 1<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rc4 - last chanc=
e to fix: 1<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0release: 0<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0proposed schedule (in 17 weeks):<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0proposal deadlin=
e: 4<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rc1 - API freeze=
: 7<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rc2 - PMD featur=
es freeze: 3<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rc3 - app featur=
es freeze: 1<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rc4 - more fixes=
: 1<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rc5 - last chanc=
e buffer: 1<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0release: 0<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Opinions?<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; <br>
<br>
Someone else might comment if they spot something, but to me looks ok <br>
for RH distro and OVS project.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That is =
my impression as well.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204=
);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
RH distro is also using DPDK .11 who&#39;s release date is not changing. <b=
r>
(+cc Timothy/Flavio)<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>My concern is if p=
atches would get delayed to be merged because of this</div><div>change, but=
 I don&#39;t think that will be the case.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote=
 class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px so=
lid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
For OVS project, it only integrates DPDK .11 release too and aims to do <br=
>
that by EOY to make the next OVS release. DPDK stable releases are <br>
integrated into older OVS branches when available. I don&#39;t think older =
<br>
OVS branch releases have a strict release schedule and having the latest <b=
r>
stable DPDK release is not a blocker anyway. (+cc Ilya/Ian/ovs-discuss)<br>=
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I agree.</div><div><br></div><div>fbl=C2=
=A0</div></div></div>

--000000000000ae217605d1248863--