Hi Jo,
> there hasn't been much progress on the planning since I didn't follow
> any mails for the last week or so :)
>
> I plan to factor in the various suggestions into the roadmap I initially
> posted and put the result into the wiki tomorrow.
Excellent! Once that's public, we can spread the
Hi Rich,
there hasn't been much progress on the planning since I didn't follow
any mails for the last week or so :)
I plan to factor in the various suggestions into the roadmap I initially
posted and put the result into the wiki tomorrow.
The idea is to have a definitive timeline until Friday so
If I remember correctly, there was a window for submitting updates for the
initial Release Candidate. Where does that process stand?
___
Lede-dev mailing list
Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
On 2016-12-29 15:21, Yousong Zhou wrote:
> I am working on converting sunxi target to using new image generation
> code. The initial goal is just that preserving what the current code
> does, i.e. making fix-sized sdcard images.
>
> I'd like to add another type of image where we have read-only sq
On 24 December 2016 at 22:40, Daniel Golle wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 08:13:00PM +0100, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
>> ...
>> # Open questions
>>
>> - Are there any outstanding changes?
>>
>> Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
>> release? Is there pendi
On 22 December 2016 at 13:42, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> On 21 December 2016 at 20:13, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
>> - Are there any outstanding changes?
>>
>> Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
>> release? Is there pending stuff in the staging trees which should
>>
On 12/24/2016 03:40 PM, Daniel Golle wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 08:13:00PM +0100, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
>> ...
>> # Open questions
>>
>> - Are there any outstanding changes?
>>
>> Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
>> release? Is there pending stu
Hi!
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 08:13:00PM +0100, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
> ...
> # Open questions
>
> - Are there any outstanding changes?
>
> Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
> release? Is there pending stuff in the staging trees which should
> absolutely go
Hi,
Le 12/21/16 à 11:13, Jo-Philipp Wich a écrit :
> # Open questions
>
> - Are there any outstanding changes?
>
> Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
> release? Is there pending stuff in the staging trees which should
> absolutely go into the first release?
> On 2016-12-21 20:13, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
> - Are there any outstanding changes?
>Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
>release? Is there pending stuff in the staging trees which should
>absolutely go into the first release?
>
Imho an important issue t
On 22/12/2016 21:59, Rich Brown wrote:
> Is it too soon to begin identifying/enumerating the features/packages that
> will go into the 17.01 release? Thanks.
>
> Rich
if you would do that it'd be amazing. i recall doing it myself for the
last 2 releases and it is actually a huge pile of work.
On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, Rich Brown wrote:
Is it too soon to begin identifying/enumerating the features/packages that will
go into the 17.01 release? Thanks.
nope, you can start going through the git log history to pick out things that
you think should be highlighted now. Even if the release doe
Is it too soon to begin identifying/enumerating the features/packages that will
go into the 17.01 release? Thanks.
Rich
___
Lede-dev mailing list
Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
The sender domain has a DMARC Reject/Quarantine policy which disallows
sending mailing list messages using the original "From" header.
To mitigate this problem, the original message has been wrapped
automatically by the mailing list software.--- Begin Message ---
On Thursday, December 22, 2016 1:1
On 22/12/2016 13:42, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> On 21 December 2016 at 20:13, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
>> - Are there any outstanding changes?
>>
>> Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
>> release? Is there pending stuff in the staging trees which should
>> absolute
Hi Rafał,
> 1) Possible brcmfmac fix
> I'm working on this for last few days, if that happens to work, it may
> improve brcmfmac stability.
Noted.
> 2) Better support for tri-band devices in brcmfmac
> I didn't start working on this yet, but it should be easy and many
> people were complaining o
On 21 December 2016 at 20:13, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
> - Are there any outstanding changes?
>
> Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
> release? Is there pending stuff in the staging trees which should
> absolutely go into the first release?
1) Possible brcmfmac
On 22/12/2016 13:19, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
>
> On 2016-12-21 20:13, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
>> - Are there any outstanding changes?
>>
>>Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
>>release? Is there pending stuff in the staging trees which should
>>absolutely
On 2016-12-21 20:13, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
- Are there any outstanding changes?
Is there important changes we should wait for before branching the
release? Is there pending stuff in the staging trees which should
absolutely go into the first release?
Bump musl to a newer head? (or b
On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, James Feeney wrote:
On 12/22/2016 01:33 AM, David Lang wrote:
the reason for this is sort order, if something is sorting versions with an
alpha sort, you want the ~rc to show up as older than the YY.MM release, and you
want that to show up as older than the YY.MM.N releases
On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, James Feeney wrote:
On 12/21/2016 12:13 PM, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
Tags will follow the format "vYY.MM.N[-RC#]" with YY.MM being the base
release version, N being the number of the minor release and an optional
-RC# designating release candidate numbers.
With respect to
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
- set grace period of 5 days to identify and fix blockers
day 16 - extend grace period by 5 days until blockers are resolved
As a practical matter, make these 7 days rather than 5 days. the shift between
the work-week and the release sche
On 21/12/2016 20:23, Dave Taht wrote:
> a) It is obviously my sincere hope that the wifi airtime fairness
> patches make this release.
>
> b) is there any plan in the cards to fund a "stable maintainer", or
> otherwise make assurances, that a stable release will be maintained
> for X time?
i am
a) It is obviously my sincere hope that the wifi airtime fairness
patches make this release.
b) is there any plan in the cards to fund a "stable maintainer", or
otherwise make assurances, that a stable release will be maintained
for X time?
c) I am curious as to what "big changes" are pending aft
Hi guys,
I spent the last few weeks working on automating the release procedure
as much as possible and am now mostly satisfied with the result.
Currently, I am reusing most parts of the existing build bot logic and
developed some scripts to automate the setup of release build bots and
to homogen
25 matches
Mail list logo
