From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-68835-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 77676 invoked by alias); 13 Apr 2016 18:22:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 76562 invoked by uid 89); 13 Apr 2016 18:22:46 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=zack, weinberg, Weinberg, Zack
X-HELO: mail-qk0-f170.google.com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization
         :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=fr84QSAKRo89qd6CHnETVgNaxno+E0kl1I5nlTH+dlw=;
        b=Fd/rlPMMRWHTeuh9NYIE5MhYhYNv9SDrJ7FofIIU4oi2t205fz8NenBSFqe7nIiSKD
         L+Dws+tfQaVrF/tLeDpLEoKOOgjiQdQtIRhZdZ/jkbkQBwsAP9JBeB8z188uECjyHrxT
         I3Pi+cXVpgQ3F0oJzG12zc4eRD8uCh9krRYL9d6vOyBtwF/HMbS+8ZTJ5CWA2nU9BiPM
         4nO5tNGOG4A3lT/81zDvF7kir1fkmsBRqVURR5kriuQfashRTK0FPVGY8Fboi+m7H19R
         MPe9pBNTFQDNNyFiZV7y24dcjuPYzurV/rkAgbXYJZ+91F/BYJF34qc4w4VRfU3bkRjK
         QdWw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUrlNnJx6xl0DBNXQCPcP4heCZa1Q7Chxa22dBltAD35QiybEhaXU0h5e8sIXE9JXPI
X-Received: by 10.55.4.149 with SMTP id 143mr13168474qke.92.1460571754149;
        Wed, 13 Apr 2016 11:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: glibc 2.24 --- Release on August 1st (hard deadline).
To: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
References: <56FD2577.6060407@redhat.com>
 <CAKCAbMinjO11nqg507kM4y5wNMh2pCybmy7tawyR3Rau6RDpLA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <570E8E67.5030603@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 18:22:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKCAbMinjO11nqg507kM4y5wNMh2pCybmy7tawyR3Rau6RDpLA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg00321.txt.bz2

On 03/31/2016 04:25 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> I would like to suggest that we release glibc 2.24 on August 1st
>> 2016 and consider this a hard deadline.
> 
> I have no objection, but just for clarity, what would this mean for
> the freeze date(s)?

We would enter the ABI/API freeze on July 1st, and work our way towards
an August 1st *or* earlier release. Just like we have done with all the
other releases e.g. start preparing for the release 30-days before the
release [1]

The sooner we get machine testing done and everyone in agreement the
earlier we release glibc 2.24, and thus the sooner we open development
on the new branch.

So the more focused we are on the release the shorter the freeze and
the sooner we get back to development.

The goal remains that we release consistently on fixed dates in a time
boxed fashion.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.

[1] https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/#Freeze_.5BREQUIRED.5D_.281_month_before_release.29