Discussion:
18.06 Status?
(too old to reply)
Hannu Nyman
2018-05-01 14:47:56 UTC
Permalink
I think that the main source tree is in pretty good shape, so branching off
the 18.0X rather soon might make sense.

There is alweays the next new exiting feature to be included in, but if the
intention is still to make several major releases per year, the next feature
will get into the next release rather soon.

So little stuff gets backported to 17.01, that a possible 17.01.5 would be
just a quick temporary fix, not a proper solution. jow was talking about that
ealier, and a 17.01.5 might be ok as a stopgap or "safe upgrade" from 17.01.x.

If 17.01.5 is really made, at least the mvebu mwlwifi driver should be
updated first. 17.01 still has the ancient June 2017 version of mwlwifi
driver, while master was recently upgrdaed to 2018-03-30 that is likely the
best driver version so far.
Dear all,
If a 18.06 release is still going to require quite a bit of work, I
propose we should look at another 17.01 point release. That should be
a nice stopgap in the form of bug fixes for people that are still
running a stable release. 17.01.4 is getting ancient to be honest.
What do you think?
Yours sincerely,
Jaap Buurman
Hi folks,
It has been exactly a month since Hauke sent his note recommending a release process for the next OpenWrt stable. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/lede-dev/2018-April/011704.html I have not seen any further discussion of this proposal.
Given that the OpenWrt/LEDE merger was founded on the desire to improve communication, I am concerned that we're not talking to each other about important questions.
It would be OK if we all agreed that we have too many pieces in flux to talk about a stable release. But I don't think it's too soon to talk about pausing the project evolution briefly and making the hard decisions about what's in, what's out. Then most people (who're unwilling to run a snapshot) can get the benefit of all your effort over the last year.
Thanks for listening,
Rich
John Crispin
2018-05-05 17:57:21 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,
I feel like everybody is just waiting for everybody to agree what
features we want in before coming up with the next step of picking a
date. Obviously this isn't working out very well. Why not turn things
around? Pick a date in a few weeks time on which the Master branch
will be split to a 18.0X branch. If nobody complains before that date
the branch goes on as planned. People can obviously get in the
features they want before said date. If somebody deems a particular
feature very important to be included in this branch, but feels like
it will not be finished before said date, he/she can request a delay
-What he/she would like to include
-Why this is so important to be included before the branch.
-How much extra time this will need by proposing a new date
-Perhaps a request for help implementing said change
Should this proposal be accepted, we will reschedule the date from
there. If the other people don't think it is important enough to
postpone the release, the old date will stand. This way, we can simply
move forward if nobody complains about a particular date instead of
the waiting around for others that is going on right now. What does
everybody else think of this idea? What seems like a reasonable date?
And who would be willing to take on the task of splitting the branch
at said date to make sure we'll be actually moving forward with the
plan at said date?
Yours sincerely,
Jaap Buurman
Post by Hannu Nyman
I think that the main source tree is in pretty good shape, so branching
off the 18.0X rather soon might make sense....
I would also think its time to branch 18.[something-soon], and rather than
focus on work that needs yet to be completed, look to cut hardware and
packages that are not ready for a release. There is always some heart ache
when such decisions are made, but at a point those decisions do need to be
made. Without an official release to punctuate both the core team and other
packagers hard work, OpenWrt/LEDE could risk losing support from the
community and its limited sponsorship. I imagine this project means
something personally to the core team, so those risks should be considered.
- Eric
_______________________________________________
lede-adm mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-adm
_______________________________________________
Lede-dev mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
we agreed already to branch on friday but delayed it till start of the
week as we ran out of time before calling it a day.
    John
Fernando Frediani
2018-05-05 18:41:02 UTC
Permalink
One characteristic from OpenWrt, different from other projects is the
lack of a leader or a person who can gather others together, make some
decisions or push for them to happen. If one doesn't like this title it
can also be "Project Manager" or "Project Coordinator". This, in my
view, makes a big difference for things to flow in time.

Has anyone heard that saying: "A dog with many owners starves"

Perhaps it is the time to adjust the Rules (https://openwrt.org/rules)
and add something to make it exist in benefit of the project.

Fernando
Hi all,
I feel like everybody is just waiting for everybody to agree what
features we want in before coming up with the next step of picking a
date. Obviously this isn't working out very well. Why not turn things
around? Pick a date in a few weeks time on which the Master branch
will be split to a 18.0X branch. If nobody complains before that date
the branch goes on as planned. People can obviously get in the
features they want before said date. If somebody deems a particular
feature very important to be included in this branch, but feels like
it will not be finished before said date, he/she can request a delay
-What he/she would like to include
-Why this is so important to be included before the branch.
-How much extra time this will need by proposing a new date
-Perhaps a request for help implementing said change
Should this proposal be accepted, we will reschedule the date from
there. If the other people don't think it is important enough to
postpone the release, the old date will stand. This way, we can simply
move forward if nobody complains about a particular date instead of
the waiting around for others that is going on right now. What does
everybody else think of this idea? What seems like a reasonable date?
And who would be willing to take on the task of splitting the branch
at said date to make sure we'll be actually moving forward with the
plan at said date?
Yours sincerely,
Jaap Buurman
Post by Hannu Nyman
I think that the main source tree is in pretty good shape, so branching
off the 18.0X rather soon might make sense....
I would also think its time to branch 18.[something-soon], and rather than
focus on work that needs yet to be completed, look to cut hardware and
packages that are not ready for a release. There is always some heart ache
when such decisions are made, but at a point those decisions do need to be
made. Without an official release to punctuate both the core team and other
packagers hard work, OpenWrt/LEDE could risk losing support from the
community and its limited sponsorship. I imagine this project means
something personally to the core team, so those risks should be considered.
- Eric
_______________________________________________
lede-adm mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-adm
_______________________________________________
lede-adm mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-adm
Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
2018-05-05 19:08:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fernando Frediani
One characteristic from OpenWrt, different from other projects is the
lack of a leader or a person who can gather others together, make some
decisions or push for them to happen. If one doesn't like this title it
can also be "Project Manager" or "Project Coordinator". This, in my
view, makes a big difference for things to flow in time.
Maybe we just need someone to be the Release Coordinator, that can be
responsible for a single
release. John seems to be doing that job for this one.

ML info about 18.xx release is scarce. Maybe something was discussed
elsewhere (IRC, forum, in person)

I really thing that a time based release would work better without a
central project leader.
The "when" would already be set. The "what" is what was already commited.
It could even be automated. If something is not commited yet, just wait for
the next release.
If we could do it more often (6 or 8 months), it would not matter too much
if a feature was skipped.

I have pending patches both on maillist (improves backup) and github (fixes
easy-rsa) that I would like
to have them commited (or even rejected). Most (if not all) pending patches
on github (77) or patchwork (44)
is from developers without commit access. They are potential future
developers that will keep the project
alive. I'm not specific talking about my patches but it would be kind to
encourage new devs to have their work
considered, even to say "NAK".

Regards,
---
Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
***@gmail.com

Loading...