From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f194.google.com (mail-wr0-f194.google.com [209.85.128.194]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F47B62; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:57:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr0-f194.google.com with SMTP id 94-v6so35713707wrf.5; Fri, 01 Jun 2018 02:57:42 -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:in-reply-to :references:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=249RAZc8MJ3R4Fm4H0gAuv500bWJVlEEofCwwg5xQnI=; b=ilqiYufkikbKYO/fAtH9kDddrXT0KjK0k1sas0Uv7pUsZJQVXZ4Py6d5BfIuoZV1Bm TgRiZ0d6t+RPtYi9L4FPnuZMVDF6NiU/GQXk4uWho6/OzBgrysEh2j0gEWF4J/MOuwoe 8aMlHiALkYDl8lCqC4+9poePJlYjvp/qA0ZiSEws8kegpr4KNiHxhIvlXD3EavOVndr0 hHGkSa27MAjn1WBhjWfA5b8OA2o4pzv3qwC3Pac0IxCjWqgZJYqBI1wuA4Ar+r1TIpsy CGApZZbyeW7yKnXuQfJeSfoh/oDiZv+TGLBe1Be2dopuAuzeVZGVyOhHtDkTozWoOP2N mquw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwft5JRkPPbFthjibTvD0JZA2nkeyOgsrN+0IcfqP94RIbg83GUI kPLiNdUvMxV0kC4aQVDpw9NZqls5 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIQIXUzR/Yyw21li9jzgC6iSzGW5uukYBF3vZb/IsTpZymTDayTfDRLRB52tWMb7hP1SGN30w== X-Received: by 2002:adf:9487:: with SMTP id 7-v6mr5038089wrr.82.1527847062170; Fri, 01 Jun 2018 02:57:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a00:23c5:be9a:5200:ce4c:82c0:d567:ecbb]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o16-v6sm21662708wri.67.2018.06.01.02.57.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 01 Jun 2018 02:57:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1527847060.6997.67.camel@debian.org> From: Luca Boccassi To: Christian Ehrhardt Cc: dev , stable@dpdk.org, Thomas Monjalon Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 10:57:40 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1527762399.6997.44.camel@debian.org> 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: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] 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: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 09:57:42 -0000 On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 06:38 +0200, Christian Ehrhardt wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:26 PM, Luca Boccassi > wrote: >=20 > > Hello all, > >=20 > > 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. > >=20 > > 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. > >=20 > > Here's what we need in order to improve the quality of the stable > > releases process: > >=20 > > 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. > >=20 > > 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. > >=20 > >=20 >=20 > Hi Luca, > I discussed with Thomas about it. > I don't know how much extra effort for the stable maintainers it > would be, > but I wonder if there could be a XX.YY.z-rc tarball. > That would be > a) a more clear sign what people are used to test > b) easier to integrate as I assume quite a bunch of tests will > usually > start rebasing on tarballs instead of directly from git. >=20 > If you think everyone can derive from git easily I'm fine, I just > wondered > if a proper -rc tarball might be more comfortable for the testing > entities. >=20 > cu > Christian I think that's a good idea, and something we can consider for the next release cycle - the tools to push rc to mainline should work just the same for the stable repo. --=20 Kind regards, Luca Boccassi