From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
To: libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>,
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org>,
Michael Hudson-Doyle <michael.hudson@canonical.com>,
Simon Chopin <simon.chopin@canonical.com>,
Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Subject: Planning for glibc releases --- What should go into glibc 2.40?
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 08:29:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <779bc58e-0b2f-4b6b-9efc-e9655b2f2634@redhat.com> (raw)
Community,
In a recent Monday Patch Queue review meeting a suggestion was raised
by Adhemerval to try doing more detailed plans for the glibc releases.
The benefits of a detailed plan for a 6-month development cycle
would be that it allows reviewers to support patch review for the
committed plan.
We do something similar as we approach the end of the development
cycle by recording blockers in the release wiki and then reviewing
and making progress on the blockers.
The goal would be to do something similar but on a monthly cadence.
For example:
Month 1 - Feature 1
Month 2 - Fix 2
Month 3 - Enhancement 3
Month 4 - Hardware Enablement 4
Month 5 - Feature 5
Month 6 - Blockers
We already had a "Planning" section in the release template page
so I'm suggesting we reuse that section and plan against the months:
https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.40#Planning
I have added 2 things I'd like to see this release and put them against
February and April. My goal is to commit to these two items and support
getting them completed in that month. If they aren't complete then we
can re-evaluate. Development should proceed as normal but during patch
queue review I will give priority to the items in the plan and seek
reviewers for those items to attempt to complete the review (similar to
how we handle blockers in Month 6).
I don't want to define a complex process here. If there is something that
you would like to see happen then add it to the plan and if a given month
gets too busy then we'll discuss it as a community.
Please add items to the plan :-)
Thoughts?
I'm particularly keen to hear if the distributions have any features,
fixes, or enhancements they want to see completed.
--
Cheers,
Carlos.
next reply other threads:[~2024-02-14 13:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-14 13:29 Carlos O'Donell [this message]
2024-02-14 15:32 ` Paul Zimmermann
2024-02-14 17:26 ` Joseph Myers
2024-02-14 16:22 ` Andreas K. Huettel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=779bc58e-0b2f-4b6b-9efc-e9655b2f2634@redhat.com \
--to=carlos@redhat.com \
--cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--cc=aurelien@aurel32.net \
--cc=dilfridge@gentoo.org \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=michael.hudson@canonical.com \
--cc=schwab@suse.de \
--cc=simon.chopin@canonical.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).