From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:52306) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RXepe-0007co-Mq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:08:11 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RXepd-0007Tk-DJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:08:10 -0500 Message-ID: <1323115683.6884.8.camel@fedora64.linuxtx.org> From: "Justin M. Forbes" Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 14:08:03 -0600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: [Qemu-devel] Qemu stable releases List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org The stable tree for 1.0 has now been created and the mailing list exists. I am curious as to people's thoughts on how we should proceed. There was discussion of setting up a predictable time table for stable releases, say monthly or bimonthly, though that seems a bit difficult from past experience. Typically I get a flurry of patches shortly after a release (and they have already started for 1.0). I have tried to get a .1 release out in a timely manner, and then it seems patches for stable become few and far between. In the 0.14 and 0.15 series, not even enough to warrant a .2 release. Perhaps this is due to lack fixed issues, or lack of effort to submit to stable. What I would like to recommend is the following: 1) On the 15th of every month, the stable queue will be evaluated for release. 2) If enough patches exist (or critical enough patches exist), a stable release will be cut as soon as testing/push/mirror can be done. If there are no patches, or not enough patches to warrant a release, they will be held over until the next release. 3) Security fixes do not follow this schedule, and will trigger a stable release as needed. Questions, comments, concernes? How do people feel about this? Justin