Re: proposal deadline

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>]

2016-12-06 13:25, Stephen Hemminger:
> On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 23:44:51 +0100
> Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > There were a lot of patches v1 submitted these last days, just before the
> > proposal deadline (December 4).
> > It's good to have a lot of features for 17.02, but it means we are going
> > to have a hard time to review, rework and integrate them.
> > I think we should make an effort to send our v1 patches (or RFC) much before
> > the deadline.
> > Or we can make the proposal window shorter, but it would be less flexible.
> > Another way to manage this huge flow: start reviewing the oldest ones.
> > And if there is not enough time for proper review of the latest series,
> > some will be postponed.
> > 
> > The statistics diagram of patches proposals (v1) per week are attached.
> > You can also find it at this URL:
> > 	https://s12.postimg.org/g9uluz9u5/patchesv1.png
> > In case the diagram of v1 patches needs some comments, these were the
> > deadlines for feature proposal:
> > 	2015 October 2
> > 	2016 January 31
> > 	2016 May 9
> > 	2016 August 28
> > 	2016 December 4
> 
> I would separate new features/infrastructure from new drivers.
> In Linux, Linus still takes new driver after the merge window, but not
> new features.

You're right. We are more tolerant with drivers patches after RC1.
But significant/risky patches are not taken in last week(s).