From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f181.google.com (mail-wr0-f181.google.com [209.85.128.181]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22C284C8A; Thu, 31 May 2018 12:26:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr0-f181.google.com with SMTP id 94-v6so32439602wrf.5; Thu, 31 May 2018 03:26:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=DjHKNtKfOi1+r0mZ7/31j5z7yLbsb1MV0K03pj7+tTY=; b=qzaNQwHcAh0/0UnAe/APMLMDSDCoCeibY939tCYUsq1/CAb7AF8za63EjMLqqI8MNs 36d5x139szRBvDcAvRKP0pVTmZ8T68OhbJfsGFKXSAwNbMwOeDPvoT0Lrjil4Ggy3qQ+ ge4Orsgx+11XnG4syiG0PxTf5KCcvlMDWQaAOneuN9GdmO9N0tHt9h4peO4xsYF/UOQ/ jqMRYkdzRg5by6yO1OYQIW7RTOLQLmH2vhPtNMweD+bG1mxyTOHuR/nkA4MtCWAOEmxF 7tqvCMt48wMgrM5bJXn0xSo+NQ0oWtQ4Pne/dMrjNEdG7+uuyUuMm0n8BJsYQoTRVRBb +YsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPweKQaZVSBAw+Ges0YpllXBJfEYkPuDVKVRCyh3po55is116O1qO ssLda2462QzKOz1+3o8hI7m9QZnO X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLQuQ0c/xRWHb7JzJKQxu8LscqnBskONddumVhpnGieLR0i4tCoxfILnipWJbrog/HSizbFaw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:b2c9:: with SMTP id g67-v6mr5219383wrd.147.1527762400558; Thu, 31 May 2018 03:26:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([32.112.155.38]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i12-v6sm21299161wrn.55.2018.05.31.03.26.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 31 May 2018 03:26:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1527762399.6997.44.camel@debian.org> From: Luca Boccassi To: dev@dpdk.org Cc: stable@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 11:26:39 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6-1+deb9u1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: [dpdk-dev] Regression tests for stable releases from companies involved in DPDK X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:26:41 -0000 Hello all, At this morning's release meeting (minutes coming soon from John), we briefly discussed the state of the regression testing for stable releases and agreed we need to formalise the process. At the moment we have a firm commitment from Intel and Mellanox to test all stable branches (and if I heard correctly from NXP as well? Please confirm!). AT&T committed to run regressions on the 16.11 branch. Here's what we need in order to improve the quality of the stable releases process: 1) More commitments to help from other companies involved in the DPDK community. At the cost of re-stating the obvious, improving the quality of stable releases is for everyone's benefit, as a lot of customers and projects rely on the stable or LTS releases for their production environments. 2) A formalised deadline - the current proposal is 10 days from the "xx.yy patches review and test" email, which was just sent for 16.11. For the involved companies, please let us know if 10 days is enough. In terms of scheduling, this period will always start within a week from the mainline final release. Again, the signal is the "xx.yy patches review and test" appearing in the inbox, which will detail the deadline. Comments? --=20 Kind regards, Luca Boccassi