[Mesa-dev] [Mesa-announce] Mesa 13.0.0 release plan (Was Re: Mesa 12.1.0 release plan (Was Re: Next Mesa release, anyone?))

[Marek Olšák]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Brian Paul <brianp at vmware.com> wrote:
> On 09/30/2016 04:59 AM, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>
>> On 30 September 2016 at 03:31, Timothy Arceri
>> <timothy.arceri at collabora.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2016-09-29 at 19:17 -0700, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sep 29, 2016 5:14 PM, "Timothy Arceri" <timothy.arceri at collabora.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 2016-09-29 at 15:56 +0100, Emil Velikov 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I believe the release should be 13?? Core Mesa and the Intel driver
>>>> have reached 4.4 this release also core Mesa is now at 4.5 despite not
>>>> being enabled anywhere.
>>>
>>>
>>> My personal preference, for whatever it's worth, would be to call it
>>> 12.1.
>>> The 12.0 release was the biggest release we've had in a long time and it
>>> seems odd to me to jump to 13.0 right away when we really haven't done
>>> much
>>> at all in terms of new features. (I think it's only 2 or 3 desktop
>>> features
>>> in the case of Intel.  A bit more on the ES side I guess).
>>>
>>>
>>> My understanding is the major version has only ever been bumped when full
>>> support for a new desktop OpenGL version has been reached regardless of
>>> the
>>> number of extensions enabled. We did the same thing going from 8.0 > 9.0
>>> were as the 7 release went all the way to 7.11 over a 4 year period. It
>>> seems odd to change the way we bump versions at this point in time,
>>> although
>>> in future maybe it will need to be based on Vulkin versions also.
>>>
>> Brain freeze - seem to miss-remember that enhanced layouts (thus 4.4)
>> landed after the branch point.
>> That plus the ES3.1/ES3.2, compat for the desktop GL, (by Ilia/Ken)
>> does take us to 13.0.
>>
>> At the end of the day it's just a number albeit being the "unlucky" one.
>>
>> If we get a consensus amongst the majority of devs we can change the
>> versioning scheme. But for that let's do so in a ~weeks time - after
>> the branchpoint.
>
>
> I'd say to go to 13.0 if we're now supporting GL 4.4.  That'd follow the
> general pattern.

Intel support all features for GL 4.5, but I don't know if they expose
it. That would mean we would be stuck with number 13 forever if GL 4.5
were to be the last GL spec. We clearly need a new versioning scheme.

Marek