1 files changed, 110 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/roms/skiboot/doc/process/dev-release-process.rst b/roms/skiboot/doc/process/dev-release-process.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..83731e911
--- /dev/null
+++ b/roms/skiboot/doc/process/dev-release-process.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+.. _release-process:
+
+Development and Release Process
+===============================
+
+Skiboot follows the release cycle of `op-build`, so that each new op-build
+has a new stable skiboot. Currently, this means that we release once every
+six weeks (or so). Our *goal* is to have roughly the first 4 weeks of a
+6 week cycle open for merging new features, and reserving the final two
+weeks for stabilisation efforts after the first -rcX release.
+
+It is *strongly* preferred to have new features (especially new APIs and
+device tree bindings) to come in *early* in the cycle.
+
+Once the final release is cut, the :ref:`stable-rules` process takes over.
+
+Our process has evolved, and will so into the future. It's inspired by the
+Linux process, but not a slave to it. For example, there is currently not
+the volume of patches to justify a next tree.
+
+Here's how some of the recent (at time of writing) releases have gone:
+
+============= =========
+Date          Release
+============= =========
+Oct 31st 2017 v5.9
+Feb 6th 2018  v5.10-rc1
+Feb 9th 2018  v5.10-rc2
+Feb 15th 2018 v5.10-rc3
+Feb 21st 2018 v5.10-rc4
+Feb 23rd 2018 v5.10
+Mar 28th 2018 v5.11-rc1
+Apr 6th 2018  v5.11
+============= =========
+
+Lifecycle of a patch
+--------------------
+
+Roughly speaking, a patch has the following lifecycle:
+
+- Design
+
+  It is best to do design work in the open, although sometimes this is hard
+  when upcoming unannounced hardware is involved. Often, it can be useful to
+  post an RFC design or patch to encourage discussion. This is especially
+  useful when designing new OPAL APs or device tree bindings. Never be afraid
+  to send a patch (or series of patches) as RFC (Request for Comment) with
+  whatever disclaimer you deem appropriate.
+
+  Once you have a design, sharing it is an important part of the process of
+  getting the applicable code upstream. Different perspectives are important
+  in coming to elegant solutions, as is having more than one person understand
+  the reasoning behind design decisions.
+- Review and Test
+
+  Once you think your patch is a state suitable for merging, send it to the
+  mailing list for others to review and test. Using `git format-patch` and
+  `git send-email` is good practice to ensure your patches survive being sent
+  to the list. Ensure you have followed `CONTRIBUTING.md` and have your
+  Signed-off-by present on your patches (`git commit -s` will add this for you).
+
+  It is good practice to solicit review from an expert in the area of code
+  you're modifying. A reviewer will add their Reviewed-by or Acked-by tags as
+  replies, as will anybody testing it add Tested-by. The aim of reviewing and
+  testing code before we merge it is to limit any problems to the smallest
+  number of people possible, only merging code we are collectively confident
+  that will *improve* life for all users and developers.
+- Merged to master
+
+  The maintainer as merged your patches to the development tree (the 'master'
+  git branch). Soon after this, many more people are going to be running your
+  code, so good review and testing helps ensure your inbox isn't flooded with
+  bug reports.
+
+  If your patch has also been sent to the stable tree, it's possible it also
+  gets merged there soonafter.
+- Stable release
+
+  Once a stable release is made, it's likely that your code makes its way into
+  vendor's firmware releases via their test cycles.
+- Bug fixes and maintenance
+
+  Bugs are a fact of life, sometimes in our own code, sometimes in others, and
+  sometimes in hardware. After your patch is accepted, being available for
+  input on possible bugs found and possible fixes is invaluable so that all
+  can ship high quality firmware.
+
+
+On closed source branches and forks
+-----------------------------------
+
+Even though the license that skiboot is distributed under does *allow* you
+to keep your changes private, we (the skiboot developers) cannot in any way
+provide support on the resulting code base.
+
+Additionally, the broader PowerPC Linux community has neither the capacity,
+time, or resources to support Linux running on such closed source forks.
+The kernel developers have said that patches to the kernel to support or
+work around closed skiboot changes will *not* be accepted upstream.
+
+If you keep your changes private, you are *entirely* on your own.
+
+License
+-------
+
+Skiboot is licensed under the Apache 2.0 license (see the LICENSE file in the
+source tree for the full text).
+
+Portions (e.g. our libc, CCAN modules we use) are made available under a CC0, BSD,
+or BSD-MIT license (see LICENSE files for specifics).