From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Mar 23
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:56:36 +0100
Message-ID: <4BA8BA84.3020908@redhat.com>
References: <20100323061140.GN29498@x200.localdomain>	<4BA88A6F.2050703@web.de> <4BA88F5D.6040008@redhat.com> <4BA8B7FB.2050103@codemonkey.ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Chris Wright <chrisw@redhat.com>,
	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, Xiantao Zhang <xiantao.zhang@intel.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:26828 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751848Ab0CWM4s (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 23 Mar 2010 08:56:48 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4BA8B7FB.2050103@codemonkey.ws>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On 03/23/10 13:45, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> I don't think we can pull in:
>
> - extboot
> - ia64
> - in-kernel pit[1]
> - associated command line options
> - device passthrough
>
> The question is, if we dropped those things, would people actually use
> qemu.git instead of qemu-kvm.git. If the answer is "no", what set of
> things do we need in order for people to focus on qemu.git instead of
> qemu-kvm.git.

I am not sure if anyone is still actively working on ia64. According to
the qemu-kvm.git logs, there hasn't been any real ia64 changes to the
code since my last commit in June of last year and then a couple of
minor configure bits.

IMHO we can just let it rot - not sure if Xiantao is still interested?

Cheers,
Jes