Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2] Soft Feature Freeze starts today for edk2-stable201905

["Laszlo Ersek" <lersek@redhat.com>]

On 05/23/19 07:58, Gao, Liming wrote:
> Laszlo:
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: devel@edk2.groups.io [mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io] On Behalf Of
>> Laszlo Ersek
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 9:05 PM
>> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming <liming.gao@intel.com>
>> Cc: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Cetola, Stephano
>> <stephano.cetola@intel.com>; Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>; Leif
>> Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>
>> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2] Soft Feature Freeze starts today for edk2-
>> stable201905
>>
>> On 05/22/19 14:09, Liming Gao wrote:
>>
>>> Here, I don't want to argue whether they are feature or bug. I just
>>> want to share my thinking, and collect feedback, then work out the
>>> clear rule so that all developers can follow.
>>
>> Good question. Assume we push a series that adds a feature, but then we
>> realize it was not complete. Do we consider the rest of the work feature
>> enablement, or bugfix for an earlier (already existing) feature?
>>
> 
> Now, I have one case BaseTools: Update Conf/target.template to remove Nt32Pkg/Nt32Pkg.dsc.
>  https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/41155?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,EmulatorPkg,20,2,0,31697760
> Nt32Pkg has been removed. BaseTools/Conf/target.template should be updatd. So, 
> I send this patch for it. I regard it as the bug, and plan to push it for this release. 
> 
>> Maybe it helps if we try to determine the scope of the feature
>> precisely, up-front, in the BZ. If a patch falls under that scope (and
>> under nothing else, e.g. it is not a standalone fix for another bug in
>> its own right), then we could consider it "feature addition /
>> enablement".
>>
>> In that regard, the ShellPkg & EmulatorPkg patches would be feature
>> enablement, not bug fixes.
>>
>> But I'm worried that this approach would only push the problem to a
>> different location, namely, to determining the scope as precisely as
>> possible in the TianoCore BZ. Sometimes we don't know that a module or
>> package is affected in the scope, until we try something in practice.
>>
> 
> I agree. I think this is hard to be followed. I would like to propose 
> the simple rule for the patches in Soft Feature Freeze and Hard Feature Freeze. 
> If the patch has not got R-B before Soft Feature Freeze, the patch wants
> to catch the release. The patch must get the approve from at least one Stewards.
> The patch needs to be sent to all Stewards and claim it to be added in the release.

Understood -- I think we should discuss this at the next stewards' meeting.

Thanks,
Laszlo

>> Laszlo
>>
>> 
>