+1 from me as well, and I would like to be part of this subgroup to plan the 24week release. not that I would lobby for 22 weeks of testing or anything. :)
JamO On 02/10/2017 11:01 AM, Colin Dixon wrote: > I count 5 TSC members on this thread in favor of the twice a year release > cadence. I also think that OPNFV targets twice a > year and OpenECOMP is like to do the same. Are there people that are willing > to sit down and look over the work we've done in > the past at this and providing a recommendation on what choices we should > make to go from ~8 month releases to 24-week releases? > > I think there's a lot of good starting material to work with, but it would be > good if some subset of the TSC could do some > work offline and make a cogent recommendation. > > --Colin > > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Luis Gomez <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > +1, twice a year. > >> On Feb 9, 2017, at 4:58 PM, Thanh Ha <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I think moving to a twice a year schedule is a good idea. >> >> Thanh >> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Alignment the release schedules with OpenStack & other communities >> makes sense. >> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Ryan Goulding >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> Regards, >> >> Ryan Goulding >> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Andre Fredette >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Colin Dixon >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> From today's TSC call, it sounds like 1.) is more >> technical and probably either wants an ongoing call >> or mailing list thread of it's own to go over the >> technical needs and how we might take a whack at it. >> >> --Colin >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Colin Dixon >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I know it feels way too early, but it's actually >> getting to be relatively late to talk about >> planning the Nitrogen release. I know the last few >> releases, we've talked about making pretty >> substantial changes and just ran out of steam to >> implement them. >> >> This time, I'm going to propose something slightly >> different. Why don't we try one or two more >> minor changes. The two relatively simple changes >> that come to my mind first are: >> >> 1.) Moving to having a common version range for each >> artifact rather than a common version. That is >> moving from x.y.z-SNAPSHOT to x.y.[z,z+1) or maybe >> even x.[y,y+1) and then have merge jobs publish >> both SNAPSHOT as well as release artifacts with a >> build number as fourth part of the version. I'm >> sure that there are details I'm glossing over (and I >> know of a few), but it would be a relatively >> simple step toward decoupling some of our release >> process. Some information on this is in an old >> thread here too: >> >> https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/tsc/2016-July/005536.html >> >> <https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/tsc/2016-July/005536.html> >> >> 2.) Moving to a twice a year release process. This >> would help planning by not having our release >> dates shift randomly around each year, fall more in >> line with other open source projects, get us >> cycling a bit faster, and maybe also have some more >> discipline. I talked about it a bit before here: >> >> https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/tsc/2016-July/005665.html >> >> <https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/tsc/2016-July/005665.html> >> >> >> As many probably know, OVS is moving to a twice a year >> release schedule and is aligning with OpenStack: >> >> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2016-November/324752.html >> >> <https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2016-November/324752.html> >> >> Many of our projects depend on OVS and also work with >> OpenStack. It seems that a similar alignment would >> be beneficial for ODL. >> >> Andre >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> TSC mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc >> <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc> > > > _______________________________________________ > TSC mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc > <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > TSC mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc > _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
