Hi Marek,
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 at 11:10, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On 6/24/19 3:56 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Andreas,,
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 20:49, Andreas Färber afaerber@suse.de wrote:
Hi Simon,
Am 22.06.19 um 21:14 schrieb Simon Glass:
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 20:08, Andreas Färber afaerber@suse.de wrote:
Am 22.06.19 um 20:15 schrieb Simon Glass:
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 16:10, Andreas Färber afaerber@suse.de wrote: > Am 22.06.19 um 16:55 schrieb Simon Glass: >> I'd like to better understand the benefits of the 3-month timeline. > > It takes time to learn about a release, package and build it, test it on > various hardware, investigate and report errors, wait for feedback and > fixes, rinse and repeat with the next -rc. Many people don't do this as > their main job. > > If we shorten the release cycle, newer boards will get out faster (which > is good) but the overall quality of boards not actively worked on > (because they were working good enough before) will decay, which is bad. > The only way to counteract that would be to automatically test on real > hardware rather than just building, and doing that for all these masses > of boards seems unrealistic.
Here I think you are talking about distributions. But why not just take every second release?
You're missing my point: What good is it to do a release when you yourself consider it of such poor quality that you advise others not to take it?
Who said that?
You, quoted above. In response to my concerns about decreasing quality you suggested to take only every second release. That doesn't improve the quality of either. It implies that one may have such bad quality that people should skip it and yet does nothing to improve the next.
Actually I did not say that I consider the release of such poor quality. Nor did I advise others to take it. I suspect this is a misunderstanding of "But why not just take every second release?".
My point was that if people don't have time to test every release, then just put in the time to test every second release.
So what about be the point of releasing the untested intermediate release at all ? I'm sure people can just grab u-boot/master or -rc2 just fine.
Because (I contend) these releases do actually attract testing effort and are stable in most cases. I think this is the 90/10 rule - we are adding a road-block in the project for the 10% of boards that are super, super important...so important that no one can actually find time to test them :-)
Regards, Simon