From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: York Sun Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 13:52:08 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] Please clarify "merge window" In-Reply-To: <20160603204215.GA11619@bill-the-cat> References: <5751D642.5040902@nxp.com> <20160603204215.GA11619@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: <5751EDF8.7060702@nxp.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 06/03/2016 01:41 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 12:10:58PM -0700, York Sun wrote: > >> Tom and Wolfgang, >> >> Would you please clarify "merge window" again? We have conflicting information >> regarding if merge window is considered submission window. >> >> "After the merge window closes, no new features may be added to allow for a >> release candidate phase which is intended to fix bugs and regressions." [1] >> >> vs >> >> "A patch that is generally in good shape and that was submitted while the Merge >> Window was open is eligible to go into the upcoming release, even if changes and >> resubmits are needed." [2] >> >> Regards, >> >> York >> >> [1] http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/ReleaseCycle >> [2] http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/DevelopmentProcess > > So, the rule is not iron-clad. This is not the Linux kernel and failure > to be ready to merge by -rc1 does not mean something cannot go in. But > by that same token, now that we're down to a 2 month release cycle I > feel much happier to say No to change that come too late and are too > invasive. Some big change that's posted in time but then not ready to > merge until 3 weeks until release is something I'm going to hold off on. > Thanks. York