From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Future of xenbits Linux trees
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:13:07 +0200
Message-ID: <4A295223.5050401@redhat.com>
References: <h0b67q$lsg$1@ger.gmane.org>	<C64EDDF5.7916%keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>	<940bcfd20906050705x67b51453h715e4d22c9caea61@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FA716B1526C7C4DB0375C6DADBC4EA3417372D258@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FA716B1526C7C4DB0375C6DADBC4EA3417372D258@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>, "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Dulloor <dulloor@gmail.com>, Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@valinux.co.jp>, Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@eu.citrix.com>, Christian Tramnitz <chris.ace@gmx.net>, Ian@redhat.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 06/05/09 16:37, Ian Pratt wrote:
> One of the reasons cited for sticking on 2.6.18 was that it would
> hopefully encourage folk to use pv_ops if they wanted anything more
> modern. I'm not sure that worked out too well...

Making the pv_ops kernel the officially one in xen-unstable should work 
better I think.

> It strikes me it's not a bad plan to have two trees, one based
> off the latest stable enterprise distro (in this case SLES11), and
> the pvops tree based off the latest kernel.org release.

As you've noticed above having two trees (2.6.18 + pv_ops) didn't work 
out very well so far.  I doubt s/2.6.18/2.6.27/ will change that ...

cheers,
   Gerd