On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Peter Maydell peter.maydell@linaro.org wrote:
On 1 March 2011 20:45, Jamie Bennett jamie.bennett@linaro.org wrote:
On 01/03/11 at 01:25pm, Tom Gall wrote:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Jamie Bennett jamie.bennett@linaro.org wrote:
If agreed I would propose that all projects use the milestone names and dates in the above link in their launchpad projects. Blueprints and work items can then target these milestones
That would be an annoying format change for toolchain group releases, which are already on a monthly schedule and currently use "2011.03" for milestone names, and "2011.03-0" (-1, -2 ...) for release versions. Is anybody actually currently using the milestone names in the wiki page above? If not, wouldn't it make more sense to standardise on the format we're already using? (Plus, two digit years? Very retro...)
Hi Peter. We'll keep the 2011.xx-y names for the products. Each project has product series and a planning series. The product series are ones like '4.5' or '4.4' for gcc-linaro, and 'trunk' for qemu-linaro, and these then have milestones like '2011.03'. The planning series are named after the planning cycle such as '11.05' and have milestones like '11.05-final', '11.05-alpha2', and so on.
The planning series names and dates are consistent across all of Linaro and let the PM people collapse the data into a whole of Linaro view. Every blueprint we plan to complete this cycle should be accepted for the 11.05 series and at least targeted at the 11.05-final milestone.
There is a wart though - say we plan to finish blueprint 'x' by the March release. Do we assign it to the product 2011.03 milestone or the otherwise identical planning 11.05-foo milestone?
-- Michael