3.0 release timeline proposal
matt at openssl.org
Tue Jan 7 13:35:25 UTC 2020
On 07/01/2020 13:26, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote:
> Many thanks!
> Got it, and I think this should be directly written.
beta1, 2020-06-02: Code complete (API stable, feature freeze)
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2020, 16:05 Matt Caswell, <matt at openssl.org
> <mailto:matt at openssl.org>> wrote:
> On 07/01/2020 13:00, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote:
> > When does the feature freeze happen?
> > I'm interested in publishing as much GOST support as possible.
> According to my proposal feature freeze would happen on release of
> beta1, i.e. 2020-06-02.
> > On Tue, 7 Jan 2020, 14:13 Matt Caswell, <matt at openssl.org
> <mailto:matt at openssl.org>
> > <mailto:matt at openssl.org <mailto:matt at openssl.org>>> wrote:
> > Hi all
> > Myself, Paul, Shane, Richard and Nicola had a conf call today
> to discuss
> > the outstanding tasks and effort required to get us to a final
> > We've previously said this about that timeline:
> > "We are now not expecting code completion to occur until the
> end of Q2
> > 2020 with a final release in early Q4 2020."
> > (https://www.openssl.org/blog/blog/2019/11/07/3.0-update/)
> > With that in mind we came up with the following proposal for a
> > timetable which we think is a challenging but achievable timeline:
> > alpha1, 2020-03-31: Basic functionality plus basic FIPS module
> > alpha2, 2020-04-21: Complete external provider support
> > support for new algs, support for providers which only include
> > operations in a class)
> > alpha3, 2020-05-21: Almost there (aiming to test the API
> > before beta1 freezes it)
> > beta1, 2020-06-02: Code complete (API stable, feature freeze)
> > betaN: Other beta TBD
> > Final: 2020 early Q4
> > The idea here is to set some intermediate deadlines to focus
> > on the final remaining tasks, with a series of 3 alphas prior
> to the
> > first beta release where each alpha release comes
> approximately every 3
> > weeks. We can have some flexibility to adjust this timetable
> if we think
> > it is necessary (such as by including an additional alpha
> release if
> > required).
> > Please let me know your thoughts. This would probably need to
> go to an
> > OMC vote to get approved.
> > Matt
More information about the openssl-project