On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 14:43:01 -0700, Jeremy Huddleston <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think a 3-month major-release cycle will be very taxing, especially > considering the increased codebase with drivers. We're doing 3 month releases with the intel drivers today; it's working out pretty well as I think we're more responsive to regressions and other bugs than we used to be. The question is whether driver maintainers want to deal with non-maintenance changes (like new hardware support) in the stable branch of the X server, which will require additional work as they back-port things from master. > Another possibility to take some load off of the release manager might > be allowing "assistant release manager" (or possibly "assistant to the > release manager" ;>) positions for the drivers. That way, Keith > doesn't need to be the gate-keeper for an increasing code-base, and > the driver developers still have the same manager for their driver in > its new location as they did in its old location. We've already got that in places already in the server -- Peter does all of the input review and I've been merging from him without a huge amount of additional review. I would expect any driver getting merged to the server to have a single driver maintainer that sends the pull requests; there's no way I can review Radeon or nVidia driver changes in any detail. -- [email protected]
pgpNdjFaV6qHd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
