From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: New Release Process Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 13:31:07 -0600 Message-ID: <43D9237B.8040301@us.ibm.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ian Pratt Cc: xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Ian Pratt wrote: >My current inclination is to call a 3.0.1 release Friday/Saturday and >sweep the tree into -testing. Monday morning we'd then incorporate hvm >and the 2.6.15 tree and work flat out to get that fully tested and >stabilized ASAP, so SuSE can pick it up for SLES10. > > Yeah, this is a good idea. Many of us were hoping at the Summit that 3.0.1 would be released ASAP. >What do other developers feel about trying to help SuSE out like this? > > In my mind, switching to a higher kernel version is always a good thing especially since it gets us closer to being able to start dropping patches for upstream merge. >No doubt we might have to end up doing something similar for RH come the >RHEL5 freeze date. My feeling is that its in the xen community's >interest to have the best possible vendor releases, as the users always >end up coming to our mailing lists to complain :) > > Frequently releases are a very good thing. If we have frequent releases, and stay close to the upstream kernel, we shouldn't have to worry much about the distro releases. Regards, Anthony Liguori >What do you think? Should we stick with 2.6.15 or go to 2.6.16-rc1 ? > >Any reason not to call 3.0.1 now? There are a load of bug fixes and >improvements over 3.0.0. > >Ian > > > > > > > > > > > > > >