X server 1.9 release thoughts

[Keith Packard]

On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 04:47:13 +1000, Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> wrote:

> Er, is there no reason hardware enable (even if it's not entirely
> fully-featured) can't be done in point releases?

On second thought, this would require additional work for driver
developers who would also need to deliver these same changes to the
master branch.

If the goal is to get more testing on code which is closer to 'master',
then releasing 'master' more often seems like the best way to manage
that.

Of course, we could do both -- release master more often, *and* allow
driver maintainers to back-port hardware support to the stable branch.
Hardware support that depends on major X server changes may not get
back-ported at all.

I have a slight preference for faster releases; I don't think it
significantly increases the burden for most developers as they'll work
From master in any case. The trick is to mostly ignore the 'merge
window' until you're actually ready to submit code for release, at which
point you just check what the current release phase is and either submit
immediately or pend until the next suitable window.

--
keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20100406/e020909d/attachment.pgp>