From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7235B3C; Fri, 9 Mar 2018 16:24:06 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Mar 2018 07:24:04 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,446,1515484800"; d="scan'208";a="181339535" Received: from fyigit-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.62]) ([10.237.221.62]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Mar 2018 07:24:02 -0800 To: Thomas Monjalon , "Ananyev, Konstantin" Cc: Luca Boccassi , "web@dpdk.org" , "yliu@fridaylinux.org" , "ktraynor@redhat.com" , "techboard@dpdk.org" References: <20180309133612.19927-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <5601805.V4YcVmhU8q@xps> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725890F22385@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <138268661.yuZPGn2xFY@xps> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 15:24:01 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <138268661.yuZPGn2xFY@xps> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-web] [dpdk-techboard] [PATCH] update stable releases roadmap X-BeenThere: web@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK website maintenance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2018 15:24:10 -0000 On 3/9/2018 2:19 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 09/03/2018 15:03, Ananyev, Konstantin: >> From: Thomas Monjalon >>> 09/03/2018 14:44, Luca Boccassi: >>>> On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 14:36 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> This is at the same time, a call for volunteer, >>>>> and a proposed change to shorten the wait for the first stable >>>>> releases >>>>> from at least 3 months to 2 months. >>>>> >>>>> Let's add this discussion to the agenda of the next techboard >>>>> meeting. >>>> >>>> The issue is how to decide what goes into a stable release, if it does >>>> not follow a main release. >>>> >>>> Right now we follow the main release as that means there is a list of >>>> accepted and merged commits that can be backported - if the stable >>>> release is anticipated, what is going to be backported? >>> >>> If we pull patches more regularly in master, there can be a lot of fixes >>> accumulated during 2 months. >> >> But these patches need to be properly tested before going into LTS, right? >> So it means extra effort for the validation teams? > > Exact > The stable release must be validated anyway. > The proposal is to validate the .1 release before starting RC1 validation, > instead of doing it after the .0 release. I have same concern with Konstantin. Why merging unverified patches to the stable tree? It is not uncommon that we fix fixes during rc phase. I am for waiting proper release to backport fixes to the stable release. For specific cases, like backporting a specific hot fixes to the stable, I understand having stable release before actual release, but for that case the scope and what to focus/test is limited and can be managed. Is there a request received to get stable trees earlier? What is the motivation of the change?