From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mt158-00063t-1B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:27:06 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mt153-00061a-4c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:27:05 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43417 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mt152-00061W-Rf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:27:00 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:13434) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mt152-0004p9-DC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:27:00 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:26:17 -0300 From: Luiz Capitulino Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Release plan for 0.12.0 Message-ID: <20090930122617.40ebe188@doriath> In-Reply-To: <30defc5b0909300803y4edcfca3p7ca2a7ee079d72a7@mail.gmail.com> References: <4AC29E4D.80707@us.ibm.com> <20090930103001.21aa7a8d@doriath> <4AC36F0C.8020400@us.ibm.com> <30defc5b0909300803y4edcfca3p7ca2a7ee079d72a7@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Fred Leeflang Cc: Andrzej@gnu.org, Anthony Liguori , kvm-devel , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Blue Swirl , Paul Brook , "Edgar E. Iglesias" , Aurelien Jarno On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:03:23 +0200 Fred Leeflang wrote: > 2009/9/30 Anthony Liguori > > > Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:54:53 -0500 > >> Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> I think aiming for early to mid-December would give us roughly a 3 month > >>> cycle and would align well with some of the Linux distribution cycles. I'd > >>> like to limit things to a single -rc that lasted only for about a week. > >>> This is enough time to fix most of the obvious issues I think. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> How do you plan to do it? I mean, are you going to create a separate > >> branch > >> or make master the -rc? > >> > >> Creating a separate branch (which is what we do today, iiuc) makes it > >> get less attention, freezing master for a certain period is the best > >> way to stabilize. > >> > >> Is this what you had in mind? > >> > >> > > What do people think? > > > > One reason I branch is because some people care a bit less about releases > > so it makes the process non-disruptive to them. If the other maintainers > > agreed though, I would certainly like to have the master branch essentially > > frozen for the week before the release. > > > > freezing is only neccesary if you need time to gather all the patches, build > and test them together etc. Not exactly, freezing is done to stop/slowdown writing new code and focus on bug fixing for a period of time. This is not only needed for a release, but projects should always try to find the best balance between 'number of bugs' and 'feature addition rate'. > If you don't feel you or the developers need to > do that to get a reliable release out I think it only halts developers > without any clear reason to do so. Calling 'attention' to a release is not a > clear reason IMO. Having a functional and relatively stable release is not only important, but it's the ultimate goal IMO. Obviously we should take care not to take extremes. No QEMU release will be 100% bug free, that's why we have stables.