If we're aiming for a September 28 release then I propose we should have a dev freeze by September 1. Bug fixes only during that month; anything that's mere polishing goes on a branch.
I don't want to release 1.0 without having https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ntp-data-minimization-01 implemented. As of the last IETF meeting I'm confident that there aren't going to be any significant normative changes before it's finalized. I'll make the time for this before my proposed September 1 freeze. On 8/7/17, Eric S. Raymond via devel <devel@ntpsec.org> wrote: > Summary: > > * We need to start working towards a 1.0 release no later than 28 > September. > > * I need our senior devs to identify any release-blocker issues > and tell me what they think our pre-release priorities should be. > > Details: > > On Saturday, I had a phone conversation with Mark Atwood during which > he apologized to me and the team for being pretty absent recently. I > assured him that we all get it about a adjusting to a senior position > at Amazon being enough to eat anyone's bandwidth. > > Then yesterday (Sunday), at an ICEI planning meeting, Susan Sons > revealed a hard deadline for an NTPsec 1.0 release. For fundraising > purposes she needs it to be out by the O'Reilly infosec conference on > 28 October. > > If I had believed that Mark was going to be back on stream in the near > future I would have left it to him to respond. As it is, and > considering my evaluation of the state of the project, I assured Susan > that Oct 28 was doable and committed us to it. > > Since Mark and I were previously discussing an end-of-summer release > date, I doubt he will object. If and when Mark becomes available I > will cheerfully defer to his judgment about state of readiness and > release timing, if we have not already shipped. In the mean time, > I'll step up. > > This might have been a tougher call, but since early summer we've > basically been polishing (Ian's AgentX work will be a nice-to-have but > I do not regard it as essential for a 1.0 release). I experimentally > faded out of view for a couple of weeks to find out if the project > would stall or hit serious difficulty without my hand on things. It > didn't. I found that reassuring. > > Accordingly, I told Susan that if she needed us to ship a week from > *now*, it would be a bit hair-raising but doable. I've seen nothing on > the issue list that I think is a blocker. But I need our devs to tell > me if I'm missing anything, and what set of priorities we should put > on pending work. > > I'd like to aim for no later that 28 September. That way we'll be > able to report not just first ship but a month of field experience. > > If anyone thinks my assumptions are incorrect, speak up quickly, > please. Otherwise let's ID what we need to get done and do it. I > actually think we ought to be fully able to ship in three weeks > (that is, around 28 August); let's try for that. > > Gary, Hal, Matt, Daniel: Would all of you check in on this, please? > -- > <a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a> > > Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as cooperation with good. > -- Mohandas Gandhi > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@ntpsec.org > http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
