On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 12:51:04AM -0500, Justin Pettit wrote: > > > > > On Jul 29, 2016, at 11:55 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > > > > > > We've done a good job of getting our features into master before > > > branching for the 2.6 release on the proposed date of Aug. 1. Thanks, > > > everybody. However, I know that some features targeted at 2.6 will be > > > coming in next week, because various developers have already mentioned > > > this. This means that we'll end up doing a fair amount of backporting. > > > > > > Therefore, I want to propose an experiment of changing our process for > > > this release. If the experiment works out, we can consider doing the > > > same thing for later releases. My proposal is this: > > > > > > - From Aug. 1 to Aug. 15, accept for master only bug fixes and > > > features already announced as targeted at 2.6. > > > > > > - On Aug. 15, create the branch whatever is on master at the time. > > > > > > - After Aug. 15, accept only bug fixes for 2.6 and un-freeze master. > > > > > > Comments appreciated. > > > > I think this is a good idea. Obviously, we'll want to maintain our > > same coding standards even for proposed features; if the proposed > > feature isn't in shape to be merged on the 15th, it will just need to > > land in the next release. > > Yes, agreed.
+1 to the proposal. If the community focus is on wrapping up 2.6 anyway, then branching earlier just sounds like extra work. This makes sense. -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
