From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KsIsq-0001uX-1S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:10:56 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KsIsm-0001q0-Et for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:10:55 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51744 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KsIsm-0001po-9G for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:10:52 -0400 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]:49744) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KsIsl-0002C9-Kr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:10:52 -0400 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] release date of qemu 0.9.2? Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:10:43 +0100 References: <20081021143834.GA29344@networkno.de> <48FDEC73.4000908@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <48FDEC73.4000908@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200810211610.44261.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org > >> A lot of previously supported hosts are no longer supported with TCG. I > >> would think adding those hosts would be more important than completing > >> the TCG conversion before cutting a new release. > > > > I disagree. The most important hosts are supported, the other hosts > > were largely experimental anyway, and getting rid of dyngen / gcc3 > > is IMHO worth a release. I agree with Thiemo. Removing dyngen is more important than new TCG host support. > Personally, I'd like to see much more frequent releases (every 3-6 > months). I'm okay with not having complete features (like the > dyngen->TCG conversion) or host regressions because I think there's > value in having releases regularly compared to feature based releases. > > What do other people think? I'd be willing to do the leg work of releases. Cutting releases is the easy. Making sure the tree is in a suitable state to be released is the hard bit. Releases without good quality control are IMHO pointless. Given the speed of qemu development, I think 3 months is way too short for a release cycle. You may as well just have everyone pull from SVN. Paul