From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 711222E8B; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 09:41:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Jan 2017 00:41:18 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,258,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="55231796" Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.67.162]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Jan 2017 00:41:17 -0800 Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 16:43:30 +0800 From: Yuanhan Liu To: John McNamara , Thomas Monjalon Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20170120084330.GY9046@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] doc: add guidelines on stable and lts releases 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, 20 Jan 2017 08:41:20 -0000 On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 01:06:22PM +0000, John McNamara wrote: > Add document explaining the current Stable and LTS process. John, great doc! Thanks. Here I got one more thing to discuss about the stable release: the release cycle. (I may better start a new thread, but I hope it would be a short discussion, so I didn't bother with that). 16.07 as a first trial of stable release, I made a proposal to have 2 releases: v16.07.1 shortly after v16.11-rc1 and v16.07.2 shortly after v16.11. While the gap between v16.07 and v16.11 are 4 months, doing a release each 2 month doesn't seem that bad. It may a bit stretch then because the gap is shorter (3 months) since 16.11. Besides, the validation team here are pretty busy after rc1, meaning it doesn't seem a good idea to have another release shortly after that: they may quite be burdened. So I'm proposing to make one stable/LTS release per release cycle. For example, we will have v16.11.1 shortly after v17.02, and judging that v16.11 is a LTS release, we will have v16.11.2 after v17.05, and so on. And my plan towards a release is, I will monitor (by a script) the official tree regularly (normally, weekly), and pick patches from there if any to a specific stable branch. As before, an email notification will be sent to the author and all email addresses mentioned in the patch (normally, they are maintainers, reviewers, etc) once a patch is picked as a stable candidate. Doing this regularly, hopefully, tells people that DPDK stable/LTS is live and actively maintained. Any objections? If no, I could start picking patches since the beginning of next week. Thanks. --yliu