DPDK usage discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* release schedule change proposal
@ 2021-11-15 14:58 Thomas Monjalon
  2021-11-15 15:11 ` Luca Boccassi
                   ` (3 more replies)
  0 siblings, 4 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2021-11-15 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev, users
  Cc: david.marchand, ferruh.yigit, andrew.rybchenko, qi.z.zhang,
	jerinj, rasland, maxime.coquelin, gakhil, bluca, ktraynor,
	bruce.richardson, mdr, konstantin.ananyev, olivier.matz,
	honnappa.nagarahalli, hemant.agrawal, aconole, ajit.khaparde

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?



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: release schedule change proposal
  2021-11-15 14:58 release schedule change proposal Thomas Monjalon
@ 2021-11-15 15:11 ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-11-15 15:39   ` Jerin Jacob
  2021-11-15 16:06 ` Kevin Traynor
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  3 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Luca Boccassi @ 2021-11-15 15:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon, dev, users

On Mon, 2021-11-15 at 15:58 +0100, 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?

We upload only LTS releases to Debian/Ubuntu, so as long as those stay
the same as it is proposed here, no problem for us.

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: release schedule change proposal
  2021-11-15 15:11 ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-11-15 15:39   ` Jerin Jacob
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jerin Jacob @ 2021-11-15 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Luca Boccassi; +Cc: Thomas Monjalon, dpdk-dev, users

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 8:42 PM Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2021-11-15 at 15:58 +0100, 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)


+1


> >
> > 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?
>
> We upload only LTS releases to Debian/Ubuntu, so as long as those stay
> the same as it is proposed here, no problem for us.
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Luca Boccassi

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: release schedule change proposal
  2021-11-15 14:58 release schedule change proposal Thomas Monjalon
  2021-11-15 15:11 ` Luca Boccassi
@ 2021-11-15 16:06 ` Kevin Traynor
  2021-11-19 13:48   ` Flavio Leitner
  2021-11-19 15:22   ` Ilya Maximets
  2021-11-15 16:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
  2021-11-18  4:08 ` Ajit Khaparde
  3 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kevin Traynor @ 2021-11-15 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon, dev, users
  Cc: david.marchand, ferruh.yigit, andrew.rybchenko, qi.z.zhang,
	jerinj, rasland, maxime.coquelin, gakhil, bluca,
	bruce.richardson, mdr, konstantin.ananyev, olivier.matz,
	honnappa.nagarahalli, hemant.agrawal, aconole, ajit.khaparde,
	Ilya Maximets, Ian Stokes, ovs-discuss, Timothy Redaelli,
	Flavio Leitner

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.

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

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)


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: release schedule change proposal
  2021-11-15 14:58 release schedule change proposal Thomas Monjalon
  2021-11-15 15:11 ` Luca Boccassi
  2021-11-15 16:06 ` Kevin Traynor
@ 2021-11-15 16:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
  2021-11-15 17:15   ` Shepard Siegel
  2021-11-18  4:08 ` Ajit Khaparde
  3 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2021-11-15 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon
  Cc: dev, users, david.marchand, ferruh.yigit, andrew.rybchenko,
	qi.z.zhang, jerinj, rasland, maxime.coquelin, gakhil, bluca,
	ktraynor, bruce.richardson, mdr, konstantin.ananyev,
	olivier.matz, honnappa.nagarahalli, hemant.agrawal, aconole,
	ajit.khaparde

On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 15:58:15 +0100
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> 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)

This nicely adapts to the natural slowdown due to holidays
in December and August.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: release schedule change proposal
  2021-11-15 16:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2021-11-15 17:15   ` Shepard Siegel
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Shepard Siegel @ 2021-11-15 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon
  Cc: dev, Stephen Hemminger, users, david.marchand, ferruh.yigit,
	andrew.rybchenko, qi.z.zhang, jerinj, rasland, maxime.coquelin,
	gakhil, bluca, ktraynor, bruce.richardson, mdr,
	konstantin.ananyev, olivier.matz, Honnappa.Nagarahalli,
	hemant.agrawal, aconole, ajit.khaparde

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 427 bytes --]

> Opinions?

Atomic Rules has been releasing our Arkville product in lockstep with DPDK
for the past 19 quarters. Our FPGA solution has the added burden of testing
with async releases of FPGA vendor CAD tools. Although we have gotten used
to the quarterly cadence, for the reasons given by Thomas and others,
Atomic Rules supports the move to a three release per year schedule.

Shepard Siegel, CTO and Founder
atomicrules.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 595 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: release schedule change proposal
  2021-11-15 14:58 release schedule change proposal Thomas Monjalon
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2021-11-15 16:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2021-11-18  4:08 ` Ajit Khaparde
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ajit Khaparde @ 2021-11-18  4:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon
  Cc: dpdk-dev, users, David Marchand, Ferruh Yigit, Andrew Rybchenko,
	Qi Zhang, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran, Raslan Darawsheh,
	Maxime Coquelin, Akhil Goyal, Luca Boccassi, Kevin Traynor,
	Bruce Richardson, Ray Kinsella, Ananyev, Konstantin,
	Olivier Matz, Honnappa Nagarahalli, Hemant Agrawal, Aaron Conole

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 6:58 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> 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
+1

>
> Opinions?
>
>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: release schedule change proposal
  2021-11-15 16:06 ` Kevin Traynor
@ 2021-11-19 13:48   ` Flavio Leitner
  2021-11-19 15:22   ` Ilya Maximets
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Flavio Leitner @ 2021-11-19 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kevin Traynor
  Cc: Thomas Monjalon, dev, users, David Marchand, ferruh.yigit,
	andrew.rybchenko, qi.z.zhang, jerinj, rasland, Maxime Coquelin,
	gakhil, Luca Boccassi, Richardson, Bruce, mdr,
	konstantin.ananyev, olivier.matz, honnappa.nagarahalli,
	hemant.agrawal, Aaron Conole, ajit.khaparde, Ilya Maximets,
	Ian Stokes, ovs-discuss, Timothy Redaelli

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2420 bytes --]

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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3567 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: release schedule change proposal
  2021-11-15 16:06 ` Kevin Traynor
  2021-11-19 13:48   ` Flavio Leitner
@ 2021-11-19 15:22   ` Ilya Maximets
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Maximets @ 2021-11-19 15:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kevin Traynor, Thomas Monjalon, dev, users
  Cc: i.maximets, david.marchand, ferruh.yigit, andrew.rybchenko,
	qi.z.zhang, jerinj, rasland, maxime.coquelin, gakhil, bluca,
	bruce.richardson, mdr, konstantin.ananyev, olivier.matz,
	honnappa.nagarahalli, hemant.agrawal, aconole, ajit.khaparde,
	Ian Stokes, ovs-discuss, Timothy Redaelli, Flavio Leitner

On 11/15/21 17:06, Kevin Traynor 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.
> 
> RH distro is also using DPDK .11 who's release date is not changing. (+cc Timothy/Flavio)
> 
> 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 that this schedule change doesn't change much for OVS.

One thing to highlight though: Change of main release schema
seems to directly impact schedule of stable releases.
In this case, interval between DPDK stable releases increases
from 3+ to 4+ months.  This might be a long time to wait for
certain bug fixes, especially if OVS needs to skip one of the
DPDK stable releases due to issues introduced in it.
Anyway, doesn't sound like something critical to me.

Bets regards, Ilya Maximets.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-11-23 15:06 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-11-15 14:58 release schedule change proposal Thomas Monjalon
2021-11-15 15:11 ` Luca Boccassi
2021-11-15 15:39   ` Jerin Jacob
2021-11-15 16:06 ` Kevin Traynor
2021-11-19 13:48   ` Flavio Leitner
2021-11-19 15:22   ` Ilya Maximets
2021-11-15 16:58 ` Stephen Hemminger
2021-11-15 17:15   ` Shepard Siegel
2021-11-18  4:08 ` Ajit Khaparde

DPDK usage discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/users/0 users/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 users users/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/users \
		users@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index users

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.users


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git