[Release-testers] [cfe-dev] [3.9 Release] Release plan and call for testers

Dimitry Andric via Release-testers release-testers at lists.llvm.org
Sun Jun 12 05:27:38 PDT 2016

On 10 Jun 2016, at 22:38, Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> It's time to start planning for the 3.9 release.
> Please let me know if you'd like to help providing binaries and
> testing for your favourite platform.

As usual, I volunteer for providing FreeBSD binaries and testing.

> I propose the following schedule:
> - 18 July: Create the release branch; build and test RC1 soon thereafter.
> - 1 August: Tag, build and test RC2. Any unfinished features need to
> be turned off by now. As we get closer to the release, the bar for
> merging patches rises.
> - 22 August: Tag 3.9.0-final. The release ships when binaries are ready.

I would put three weeks between RC1 and RC2, to allow more last-minute
bugs to be fixed, and two weeks between RC2 and final, but it is always
little arbitrary.

> Also, I have three more questions for the community:
> 1) Right after the branch, the version number of the trunk will be
> incremented. I assume this means bumping the major version number,
> taking us to 4.0? IIUC, that's what happened after 1.9 and 2.9.

4.0.  Since gcc is already at 7.0, we need to catch up! ;-)

> 2) Following up on the May thread about the release process [1], I'd
> like to make the schedule we've followed for the last few years more
> official by posting somewhere on the web page that we're committed to
> shipping two major releases per year: one in early March (branching
> mid-January), and one early September (branching mid-July), usually
> with one (or sometimes two) "dot" releases in between.

Having predictable release schedules is nice.  If everybody knows the
tree should be in fairly good shape at the point of branching, any heavy
refactoring can be postponed until after such branching (or preferably,
until after the actual release).

> 3) Another follow-up from that thread: it's usually the same people
> who test the releases for their platform. Rather than asking everyone
> each time, I'd like to make a list of who's responsible for each
> platform and put that on the web page. Testers can still sign-up or
> resign as they like, of course. Would you testers be OK with this?

You can put me up for the FreeBSD platform, obviously.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/release-testers/attachments/20160612/e16beefe/attachment.sig>

More information about the Release-testers mailing list