[Mesa-dev] Mesa 12.1.0 release plan (Was Re: Next Mesa release, anyone?)

[Bas Nieuwenhuizen]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 3:31 AM, Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 September 2016 at 01:07, Jason Ekstrand <jason at jlekstrand.net> wrote:
>> On Sep 29, 2016 7:56 AM, "Emil Velikov" <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28 September 2016 at 19:53, Marek Olšák <maraeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > It's been almost 4 months since the 12.0 branch was created, and soon
>>> > it will have been 3 months since Mesa 12.0 was released.
>>> >
>>> > Is there any reason we haven't created the stable branch yet?
>>> >
>>> > Ideally, we would time the release so that it's 1-2 months before fall
>>> > distribution releases.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Thanks Marek !
>>>
>>> In all honesty I was secretly hoping that we'll get Dave/Bas RADV for
>>> 12.1. With the topic of which would be 'the default' Vulkan driver for
>>> ATI/AMD hardware to be considered at a later stage.
>>
>> If they have even close to the amount of work we had to get it merged, I
>> don't think that's at all realistic.  Then again, Dave is the one who wants
>> to have a Vulkan driver for AMD hardware that he can package and ship so
>> I'll let him decide how badly he wants it in this release.
>>
>>> That said here are the tentative dates:
>>>
>>> Oct 7/14 2016 - Feature freeze/Release candidate 1
>>> Oct 14/21 2016 - Release candidate 2
>>> Oct 21/28 2016 - Release candidate 3/final release
>>>
>>> Fwiw I'm still in favour of getting RADV in even if it's not
>>> perfect/feature complete. Devs, let me know if there's a "must have"
>>> feature that we want in 12.1.
>
> The main problem I have with merging radv is the whole conformance testing
> end of it.
>
> It's probably fine if I just make a big printf on device creation that RADV
> isn't a conformant vulkan implementation yet. Sorta like what Intel do on the
> older GPUs.
>
> Otherwise I don't think merging it is a big job, it's 30,000 lines of standalone
> code, I've already merged the prereq patches, and I think any code sharing
> should happen in tree.

I think we also need to improve the configure.ac changes a bit before
merging. I think I used the llvm version check before definition or
something and haven't gotten around to fixing that yet.

- Bas

>
> Dave.
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev