From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] proposal deadline
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 13:45:01 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1919219.0mG3jzDeNO@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161206132544.720c8627@xeon-e3>
2016-12-06 13:25, Stephen Hemminger:
> On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 23:44:51 +0100
> Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > There were a lot of patches v1 submitted these last days, just before the
> > proposal deadline (December 4).
> > It's good to have a lot of features for 17.02, but it means we are going
> > to have a hard time to review, rework and integrate them.
> > I think we should make an effort to send our v1 patches (or RFC) much before
> > the deadline.
> > Or we can make the proposal window shorter, but it would be less flexible.
> > Another way to manage this huge flow: start reviewing the oldest ones.
> > And if there is not enough time for proper review of the latest series,
> > some will be postponed.
> >
> > The statistics diagram of patches proposals (v1) per week are attached.
> > You can also find it at this URL:
> > https://s12.postimg.org/g9uluz9u5/patchesv1.png
> > In case the diagram of v1 patches needs some comments, these were the
> > deadlines for feature proposal:
> > 2015 October 2
> > 2016 January 31
> > 2016 May 9
> > 2016 August 28
> > 2016 December 4
>
> I would separate new features/infrastructure from new drivers.
> In Linux, Linus still takes new driver after the merge window, but not
> new features.
You're right. We are more tolerant with drivers patches after RC1.
But significant/risky patches are not taken in last week(s).
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-06 21:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-04 22:44 Thomas Monjalon
2016-12-06 21:25 ` Stephen Hemminger
2016-12-06 21:45 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1919219.0mG3jzDeNO@xps13 \
--to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).