Re: [Xen-devel] [Notes for xen summit 2018 design session] Process changes: is the 6 monthly release Cadence too short, Security Process, ...

[Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

George Dunlap writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [Notes for xen summit 2018 design 
session] Process changes: is the 6 monthly release Cadence too short, Security 
Process, ..."):
> I seem to recall saying that even if we agreed that moving to continuous 
> delivery was a goal we wanted to pursue, we would still be several years away 
> from achieving anything like it; and so in the mean time, it would probably 
> make sense to move back to a 9-month cycle while we attack the problem.

Another thing that is that as our window of N years'
security-supported releases has filled up with ~6-month releases,
there are more of them.

I know we had concerns that this makes backporting harder.  I'm not
really sure that's true.  The total amount of backporting lossage
(merge conflicts etc.) is the same, and trivial automatic backports
are nearly no work.

But one thing that is noticeable is that this significantly increases
our test load when a security update comes out.  Each
security-supported branch gets updates, and osstest suddenly needs to
test them all.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel