Re: Clarifying the state of ARINC653 scheduler (and other components) in Xen 4.5 and beyond

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>]

On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 13:00 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 08.06.15 at 12:43, <lars.kurth.xen@gmail.com> wrote:
> > b) Do we actually have or should have a definition of 
> > experimental/preview/supported/deprecated.  I don't think this was ever 
> > written down and was defined before I joined. Also, there are no real 
> > conventions related to changing the state.
> > 
> > c) How does b) map to the definitions in 
> > http://xenbits.xenproject.org/gitweb/?p=xen.git;a=blob;f=MAINTAINERS;hb=HEAD 
> > <http://xenbits.xenproject.org/gitweb/?p=xen.git;a=blob;f=MAINTAINERS;hb=HEAD> 
> 
> Perhaps we should simply add Experimental and Preview states to
> ./MAINTAINERS' S: specifier?

In MAINTAINERS S: Supported means:

"Someone is actually paid to look after this.", which I think is
distinct from "This works well enough that the project is happy to
recommend it is used in production". It's a shame that Supported can be
taken to mean both things.

Perhaps we should drop the distinction between Supported and Maintained
in MAINTAINERS and call everything which is "Supported" there into
"Maintained" instead.

For reference Maintained is "Someone actually looks after it.".

Alternatively if someone can think of another way to express "paid
maintainer" we could switch to that.


> 
> > And then there are probably other areas where we may have similar mismatches
> 
> Like x86 memory paging/sharing, where I'm sure the wiki page is
> what correctly reflects their states.
> 
> Jan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel