From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 711222E8B;
 Fri, 20 Jan 2017 09:41:19 +0100 (CET)
Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41])
 by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Jan 2017 00:41:18 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,258,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="55231796"
Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.67.162])
 by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Jan 2017 00:41:17 -0800
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 16:43:30 +0800
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
 Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org
Message-ID: <20170120084330.GY9046@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v1] doc: add guidelines on stable and lts
	releases
X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches <stable.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/stable>,
 <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:stable@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/stable>,
 <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 08:41:20 -0000

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 01:06:22PM +0000, John McNamara wrote:
> Add document explaining the current Stable and LTS process.

John, great doc! Thanks.

Here I got one more thing to discuss about the stable release: the release
cycle. (I may better start a new thread, but I hope it would be a short
discussion, so I didn't bother with that).

16.07 as a first trial of stable release, I made a proposal to have 2
releases: v16.07.1 shortly after v16.11-rc1 and v16.07.2 shortly after 
v16.11. While the gap between v16.07 and v16.11 are 4 months, doing a
release each 2 month doesn't seem that bad. It may a bit stretch then
because the gap is shorter (3 months) since 16.11. Besides, the validation
team here are pretty busy after rc1, meaning it doesn't seem a good idea
to have another release shortly after that: they may quite be burdened.

So I'm proposing to make one stable/LTS release per release cycle. For
example, we will have v16.11.1 shortly after v17.02, and judging that
v16.11 is a LTS release, we will have v16.11.2 after v17.05, and so on.

And my plan towards a release is, I will monitor (by a script) the
official tree regularly (normally, weekly), and pick patches from there
if any to a specific stable branch. As before, an email notification will
be sent to the author and all email addresses mentioned in the patch
(normally, they are maintainers, reviewers, etc) once a patch is picked
as a stable candidate.

Doing this regularly, hopefully, tells people that DPDK stable/LTS is
live and actively maintained.

Any objections? If no, I could start picking patches since the beginning
of next week.

Thanks.

	--yliu