[openssl-dev] Please consider delaying the Beta-1 freeze for a week or two

Emilia Käsper emilia at openssl.org
Fri Mar 11 20:19:39 UTC 2016

Returning to the issue at hand:


On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 7:24 PM Erik Forsberg <erik at efca.com> wrote:

> add Solaris to the platforms that are not at beta-level yet.
> Richard Levitte and myself are helping each other out though, so we should
> be close
> >-- Original Message --
> >
> >> noloader> Testing master on real hardware is showing some minor issues
> on a few
> >> noloader> platforms, including ARM32, ARM64, PowerPC and i686. In
> addition,
> >> noloader> there seems to be one-off issues on other combinations, like
> VIA's C7
> >> noloader> processor on Linux.
> >> noloader>
> >> noloader> In addition to the base issues, there are other minor issues
> like
> >> noloader> failing to configure and compile with 'no-comp'. Other
> configuration
> >> noloader> dependent issues include failed self tests under PowerPC in a
> shared
> >> noloader> configuration.
> >> noloader>
> >> noloader> Please consider delaying the freeze for a week or two while
> the issues
> >> noloader> are being ironed out.
> >>
> >> The upcoming release is the first beta of two planned, and we've
> >> already delayed the first for a few extra days.  It is not a final
> >> release, so there's still time to fix things like these.
> >>
> >> Please see the bottom of the release strategy for the planned dates:
> >>
> >> http://openssl.org/policies/releasestrat.html
> >
> >Well, would it be possible to survey supported platforms and see if it
> >makes sense to move forward at this point? Does the library maintain a
> >matrix of test platforms and results?
> >
> >Releasing a Beta-1 seems like its missing the point if the the point
> >of the beta is to test it. There are issues in {configure|build|test}
> >on ARM32, ARM64, OpenBSD, Windows and some Linux i686 and x86_64
> >targets/configurations. I'm also wondering about MIPS, NetBSD, FreeBSD
> >and Gentoo.
> >
> >Maybe something else to ponder in the big picture of release
> >engineering... Why are the breaks occurring and not being caught? Why
> >is the engineering process not catching them?
> >
> >(I think its OK to break things on occasion. You can't make an omelet
> >without breaking eggs. But the idea is you have to catch them quickly
> >and early before the user experiences the pain point. If the break is
> >fixed before the user experiences the pain, then it "no blood, no
> >foul" in my book).
> >
> >There's no need to rush the process. OpenSSL does not answer to anyone
> >except its own quality standards. It seems like stepping back, coming
> >up for some air, catching your breath and then diving back in will
> >produce better results in the end.
> >
> >Jeff
> >--
> >openssl-dev mailing list
> >To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
> --
> openssl-dev mailing list
> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-dev/attachments/20160311/def5200e/attachment.html>

More information about the openssl-dev mailing list