On 7 June 2016 at 18:29, Michael Roth <mdr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > I think it is actually bit shorter of a window this time. The last few > releases had around 2.5 to 3 months between n-1 release and hard freeze / rc0 > for n+1, but the proposed date would be just around 2 months.
Yeah, it's a bit short because the late-breaking CVEs meant we didn't release 2.6 until about two weeks later than we planned. If we want to have 2.5 months between n-1 and rc0, that would be something like softfreeze 5 july hardfreeze/rc0 26 july rc1 2 august rc2 9 august rc3 16 august release 22 august (before kvm forum) if we're lucky, or 30 august if we're not (more likely) [these dates are all +2 weeks on the previous suggestion.] > Being in late RC during KVM Forum also sounds like it could > be productive, but I'm not sure I'd want to be in that position > if I was Peter... >From my POV the rc3-to-rc4 stage is not that much work, but it's hard to predict who might be the person with the last-minute required fix (which is usually why we end up with about a week of slip over the theoretical schedule). The tree is not supposed to change at that point. I can do the rc/release cutting mechanics remotely (assuming no disasters like stolen laptops etc); how about your part with the tarballs? Otherwise we can just do it either before or after the conference depending on how it goes. But I think the real problem with a schedule which expects a release at the tail end of August is that we then only have three and a half months left til mid-December which is in practice the latest we want to do a release given holidays. So we can only avoid the short dev period this time round by having a short one next time instead. Maybe we could have +1 week rather than +0 or +2 (so softfreeze 28 June, rc0 19 July, release 16 August), as you suggest. That's currently feeling like the best compromise to me. thanks -- PMM