From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Larson Subject: Re: RE: New Release Process Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:45:31 -0600 Message-ID: <43DA947B.3050602@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: > What do you think? Should we stick with 2.6.15 or go to 2.6.16-rc1 ? > I agree that skipping 2.6.15 and going straight to the 2.6.16 latest rc kernels would be a good thing, however I'm confused about one thing (or more likely I'm just dense). Are you looking at pulling in one of the alternate kernel hg trees on xenbits, or just manually updating the sparse tree to 2.6.16-rc1. We have the 2.6.16 subarch merge tree, the 2.6.16 merge tree under ext, and the hvm tree under ext also. Is one of these going to become the new basis for the sparse tree? Another question this brings up: what is the process for syncing relevant changes and fixes between sparse, 2.6 merge, 2.6 subarch, and the hvm tree? Is there any plan to consolidate these? Thanks, Paul Larson