master == development :-)

Thanks for bring this up for discussion.

On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 7:50 PM Jason Lowe-Power <ja...@lowepower.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> As many of you have seen on gem5-dev, we are going to be adding a
> "stable" version of gem5. Below is the current proposal. There are a
> couple of points below where there has not been general consensus
> reached. We would appreciate feedback *from everyone in the community*
> on the points where a decision hasn't been made below. gem5 is a
> community-driven project, and we need feedback to make sure we're
> making community-focused decisions.
>
> We will be introducing a new "stable" branch type to gem5. We are
> doing this for the following reasons:
> - Provide a way for developers to communicate major changes to the
> code. We will be providing detailed release notes for each stable
> release.
> - Increase our test coverage. At each stable release, we will test a
> large number of "common" benchmarks and configurations and publicize
> the current state of gem5.
> - Provide a way for researchers to communicate to the rest of the
> community information about their simulation infrastructure (e.g., in
> a paper you can say which version of gem5 you used).
>
> On the stable version of gem5, we will provide bugfixes  until the
> next release, but we will not make any API changes or add new
> features.
>
> We would like your feedback on the following two questions:
>
> **Which branch should be default?**
>
> We can either have the master branch in git be the "stable" or the
> "development" branch. If master is the stable branch, then it's easier
> for users to get the most recent stable branch. If master is the
> development branch, it's more familiar and easier for most developers.
> Either way, we will be updating all of the documentation to make it
> clear.
>
> Please let us know which you prefer by replying "I think master should
> be stable" or "I think master should be development".
>
> **How often should we create a new gem5 release?**
>
> We can have a gem5 release once per year (likely in April) or three
> times per year (April, August, and December). Once per year means that
> if you use the stable branch you will get updates less frequently.
> Three times per year will mean there are more releases to choose from
> (but a newer release should always be better). On the development
> side, I don't think one will be more work than the other. Once per
> year means more backporting, and three times per year means more
> testing and time spent on releases.
>
> Please let us know which you prefer by replying "I think gem5 should
> be released once per year" or "I think gem5 should be released three
> times per year."
>
>
>
>
> A couple of notes to everyone who's been following the discussion on
> the gem5-dev mailing list:
> - We have dropped the proposal for major vs minor releases. Note that
> there was some pushback on having only major releases when this was
> proposed on the gem5 roadmap, but it sounded like the consensus was to
> drop minor releases for now.
> - We will still allow feature branches *in rare circumstances*. This
> will be by request only (send mail to gem5-dev if you would like to
> discuss adding a new branch), and the goal will be integration within
> a few months. All code review will still happen in the open on gerrit.
> The benefits will be
> 1) rebases won't be required as you can just make changes to the head
> of the branch
> 2) many features take more than a few months to implement, so if it's
> not ready by a release it can be pushed to the next
> 3) large changes won't be hidden in AMD or Arm-specific repositories
> and *anyone* will be able to request a branch.
>
> Thanks everyone for the discussions so far! It would be most useful to
> hear back by the end of the week. However, I don't expect any concrete
> actions will be taken until after the holidays.
>
> Cheers,
> Jason
> _______________________________________________
> gem5-dev mailing list
> gem5-dev@gem5.org
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
gem5-dev@gem5.org
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to