On 3 January 2017 at 16:53, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 03:15:58PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Considering that Easter is on April 16th, we'd probably want to have the >> release before that date even in case of a slip. >> >> On the other hand, the Christmas / New Year break here means that we'll >> have to make the development time 1-2 week shorter in practice. >> >> 2016-02-21 2.9 soft freeze >> 2016-03-07 hard freeze / rc0 >> 2016-03-28 rc3 (+3 weeks) >> 2016-04-04 rc4 or release >> 2016-04-11 release (if rc4)
[these should all have been 2017, heh] >> One possibility is to make soft freeze happen a few days later. >> Peter/Stefan, how did the experiment go with the new rules for soft >> freeze? Is it worth repeating it for 2.9 and would it make sense to >> shorten soft freeze given the new rules? > > I would shorten the soft freeze by 1 week. I hadn't noticed that this meant that we had a 1 week softfreeze period. This completely failed, partly because I didn't think we'd gone down to just 1 week, partly because I was away at a conference last week when rc0 was theoretically due, and partly because of the enormous pile of merges that needed to be done -- I only finished the merge work on the Saturday. I plan to tag rc0 tomorrow (the 14th) and push all the other dates out by a week accordingly. thanks -- PMM
