Re: [Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread Alan C. Assis
I like the LTS idea, but I need to vote -1 too! - We don't have enough staff to even review PRs, let alone create a new burden to LTS support. - The current LTS approach is forcing contributors to divide PRs in many commits, although other projects with LTS are not requiring it. - First we need to

Re: [Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread Xiang Xiao
Before we have a solid test suite to ensure the release achieves some quality level, the release is just a snapshot of a developing code base with a very basic verification(nsh+ostest), which quality is far from LTS. So, I suggest to setup the olid verification suite and automation test farm before

Re: [Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread Tiago Medicci Serrano
Hi, -1. Same arguments: we don't have enough staff to make it at the moment. Let's focus on automated testing to lower staff workload when reviewing PRs. Em qua., 26 de fev. de 2025 às 10:36, Alan C. Assis escreveu: > I like the LTS idea, but I need to vote -1 too! > > - We don't have enough s

Re: [Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread Sebastien Lorquet
Hello, Same, negative vote *in this state*. The idea of LTS releases is extremely useful and important but I believe it needs a little more organization and time. Let's first implement everything that is being decided in the other vote first. Depolyable Automated Hardware testing is also v

Re: [Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread Tim Hardisty
I was only skim reading the discussions on LTS, so probably missed detailed descriptions/conclusion of the LTS proposal. It seems a great idea but @raiden00pl makes a valid point I think? This is a vote for 13.0.0 which is an LTS candidate I would imagine. Once out in the wild, any fixes (not

Re: [Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread raiden00pl
-1 from me. 1. It's a waste of already limited resources in this project. 2. It makes life harder for contributors, by for example requiring separation of PRs on arch/boards/doc. Extra work for contributors to compensate for the project's limited resources is not okay. 3. Regarding the above poi

Re: [Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread raiden00pl
> we only need separate commits not PR which is a best practice and improves readability Lately I've been seeing something completely different on Github... Separate commits are OK, separate PRs are not. > We can provide fixes and improve the LTS releases compardd with the regular releases which

[Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread Alin Jerpelea
This vote proposes to start the LTS releases for NuttX RTOS The proposed LTS release plan is - 1st release each year is a LTS release (maintained for 1.5 years) - 6 minor releases for each release ex: 13.0.0-13.0.6 for our first LTS release Voting will be open for 72hr. A minimum of 3 binding +1

Re: [Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread Alin Jerpelea
On Wed, 26 Feb 2025, 10:32 raiden00pl, wrote: > -1 from me. > > 1. It's a waste of already limited resources in this project. > > 2. It makes life harder for contributors, by for example requiring > separation of PRs on arch/boards/doc. Extra work for contributors to > compensate for the project'

Re: [Vote] NuttX LTS release

2025-02-26 Thread alin.jerpe...@sony.com
Hi Tim, the release process for every release is having 4 weeks of stabilization ex: for the proposed release LTS release plan for 13.0.0 * create the 13.0.0 branch on 1 March * back-port the fixes (no enhancements) for 4 weeks * create the RC0 release tag on 21 March and start the release