So I think all the bits already exist somewhere and perhaps a small change in naming would go a long way to make these pushes smoother. If when we cut v240 from the master branch, we had called it v240-rc1 instead, perhaps it was clear that it could take some more testing before it was made official. Furthermore, fixes for the breakage were backported into the v240-stable tree in systemd-stable repository, so perhaps calling the top of that tree v240 (or v240.0) at some point would have been helpful. Having been pushing to systemd-stable this week (fixing one of the CVEs in previous versions), I have to say that there's some impedance to contributing to that tree, since I needed a separate fork (GitHub doesn't want to let me do PRs from my main fork), sometimes it doesn't build on the latest toolchain and libs (I'm working on fixing that too), etc. Perhaps having some more of the distro maintainers actively helping on those branches would be best. I think bringing those branches into the main repo would help in those regards. Why don't we try something slightly different for the v241 timeline? At the time of the release, we actually create a new *branch* and call it release-v241. We also tag v241-rc1 at the start of that tree and announce the pre-release. (Note that this branch means no need for v241-stable in systemd-stable anymore, so it's not a branch which wouldn't have existed, it's only in a different place now.) As distros start to do heavier and broader testing of that pre-release, we start fixing bugs at trunk, backport them to release-v241 and after a week or so release v241-rc2. Rinse and repeat. After things are stable for a couple of weeks, we can finally just bump the version number, tag v241.0 and announce the final release. Hopefully everything will go very smooth. But, if it doesn't, we can still iterate on that and release v241.1. We can also release v241.2 to address the CVEs that come up a month later (just kidding, of course there won't be any!) >From a developer's point of view, this really doesn't look too painful compared with the current process. And distros will have an useful "almost ready" point where they have time to do one-time testing and start pushing to some users to collect feedback before the final "official" or "stable" release. What do you all think? Cheers, Filipe
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
