|
From: | Anthony Liguori |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Planning for 1.0 (and freezing the master branch) |
Date: | Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:59:56 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110516 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 |
On 08/14/2011 02:30 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:>> Maybe something more like:
2 months development -rc0 goes out (master enters soft feature freeze)Why an rc0 at this point? 0.15-rc0 was in a bad shape because it was forked just after heavy development (ga etc).
It could be called -beta1 instead of -rc0. We just need to tag it with something.
I'd nominate release candidates only after soft freeze, then there would not be any major changes. Though a rc0 could attract testing efforts from outside and for those, the earlier the better.2 weeks development in master, stabilization and careful consideration of new features -rc1 goes out (master enters hard feature freeze) 1 week stabilization -rc2 goes out 1 week stabilization -rc3 goes out, -rc3 becomes releaseSo at this point master would be released? What's the difference in time between rc3 and release?
Ideally, nothing. Having an -rc3 is just a conservative mechanism to make sure that there is an absolute final call for testing before teh release.
Overall this would only give a duty cycle of 67%. For 4 weeks total freeze, the development would need to be 4 months for an 80% duty cycle. But I think this version could work too.
Yeah, that's more or less what I'm proposing for 1.0 :-) Regards, Anthony Liguori
I think a shorter cycle could work better long term. I think it needs to be done as part of the master branch though and I'd wait until 1.1 to implement it. Regards, Anthony Liguori
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |