From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brian Jackson Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM Call agenda for July 13th Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 12:19:21 -0500 Message-ID: <201007131219.21649.iggy@theiggy.com> References: <4C3C9AF9.30405@codemonkey.ws> <4C3C9BE2.5010200@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Avi Kivity , Anthony Liguori , "kvm-devel" , Aurelien Jarno , Juan Quintela To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Return-path: Received: from theiggy.com ([66.220.1.110]:53873 "EHLO mail.theiggy.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754743Ab0GMRTX (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2010 13:19:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C3C9BE2.5010200@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tuesday, July 13, 2010 12:01:22 pm Avi Kivity wrote: > On 07/13/2010 07:57 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> I'd like to see more frequent stable releases, at least if the stable > >> branch contains fixes to user-reported bugs (or of course security or > >> data integrity fixes). > > > > Would you like to see more frequent stable releases or more frequent > > master releases? > > Yes. But in this context I'm interested in stable releases. We have > bugs reported, fixed, and the fix applied, yet the fixes are unreachable > to users. Especially so since qemu-kvm 0.12-stable hasn't been merged with qemu basically since 0.12.4 came out. I was trying to help one of the Gentoo maintainers find post 0.12.4 patches the other day and had to point them to the upstream qemu stable tree.