From: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de>, Leon Alrae <leon.alrae@imgtec.com>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-mips: fix call to memset in soft reset code
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 10:06:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160512100650.3dcafe3a.cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57343365.3020603@de.ibm.com>
On Thu, 12 May 2016 09:40:21 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> Maybe a topic for this years QEMU summit could be to talk about
> release process and release criterias.
+1 to that.
> We could
> a: allow more patches , e.g. I thing that this patch would be have
> been taken in the Linux kernel a day before the release, see for
> example what is applied 4 days before a release as network fixes:
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=4d8bbbff1227bbb27fdb02b6db17f080c06eedad
> 22 files changed, 258 insertions, 86 deletions
Personally, I would probably go for something between applying this
patch and that networking pull :)
> b: as we are strict and only apply hand selected patches, regressions are
> very unlikely, so we could release sooner. For example the CVE fixes could
> have just been taken and rc5 being released as final. (which we did anyway
> but 3 days later)
>
> c: we consider everything fine and keep the process
>
> d: better ideas
One thing I've noticed is that softfreeze/early hardfreeze qemus often
seem more unstable than versions earlier in the development cycle -
probably because people panic and rush to get code in for the release.
I don't know if stricter rules/enforcement of what is supposed to go in
during softfreeze/hardfreeze would help here.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-12 8:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-09 16:44 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-mips: fix call to memset in soft reset code Aurelien Jarno
2016-05-09 17:53 ` Stefan Weil
2016-05-09 17:55 ` Peter Maydell
2016-05-09 17:57 ` Peter Maydell
2016-05-11 19:28 ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-05-11 22:41 ` Peter Maydell
2016-05-12 7:40 ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-05-12 8:04 ` Peter Maydell
2016-05-12 8:06 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2016-05-12 8:16 ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-05-12 11:45 ` Leon Alrae
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160512100650.3dcafe3a.cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--to=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=aurelien@aurel32.net \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=leon.alrae@imgtec.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=sw@weilnetz.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.