On 12/15/15, 7:37 AM, "dev on behalf of O'Driscoll, Tim" <dev-bounces at dpdk.org on behalf of tim.odriscoll at intel.com> wrote:
> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon >> Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 7:23 PM >> To: dev at dpdk.org >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] releases scheduling >> >> Hi all, >> >> We need to define the deadlines for the next releases. >> During 2015, we were doing a release every 4 months. >> If we keep the same pace, the next releases would be: >> 2.3: end of March >> 2.4: end of July >> 2.5: end of November >> >> However, things move fast and it may be a bit long to wait 4 months for >> a feature. That's why I suggest to progressively shorten release terms: >> 2.3: end of March >> 2.4: mid July >> 2.5: end of October >> and continue with a release every 3 months: >> 2.6: end of January >> 2.7: end of April >> 2.8: end of July >> This planning would preserve some of the major holiday periods >> (February, May, August, December). >> >> The first period, for the first submission of a feature, was 2 months >> long. >> Then we had 2 other months to discuss, merge and fix. >> We should shorten only the first period. >> >> Anyway, the next deadlines should be unchanged: >> - January 31: end of first submission phase >> - March 31: release 2.3 >> >> Opinions are welcome. > >I think moving to quarterly releases is a good idea. Your proposal to do this >in a gradual way, so that we don't change the 2.3 dates, also makes sense. > >Should we consider changing the release numbering at the same time? It's >difficult to keep track of when each 2.x release is due, and we don't have any >criteria in place for moving to 3.x in future. Many people like the Ubuntu >numbering scheme of Year.Month. Should we consider adopting that convention? >If we move in future to a model where we have long-term support releases >(something that was touched on in Dublin), then we could append an LTS >designation to the release number. +1 for the Ubuntu number and the LTS > > >Tim > Regards, Keith
