From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mlimg-0001NJ-VV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 08:29:55 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mlimb-0001LH-PR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 08:29:54 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35867 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mlimb-0001L3-Fc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 08:29:49 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:5780) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MlimZ-00072K-46 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 08:29:48 -0400 Received: from int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.18]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8ACTkWB023687 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 08:29:46 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:29:38 -0300 From: Luiz Capitulino Message-ID: <20090910092938.431a3622@doriath> In-Reply-To: <20090910120121.GB27014@amit-x200.redhat.com> References: <20090902074905.GB25711@chrom.inf.tu-dresden.de> <20090909121817.GA21997@chrom.inf.tu-dresden.de> <4AA7A6EC.10907@codemonkey.ws> <20090910070336.GD3351@amit-x200.redhat.com> <20090910075644.GA6769@1und1.de> <20090910100804.GA7992@amit-x200.redhat.com> <20090910084713.41dae0b4@doriath> <20090910120121.GB27014@amit-x200.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: QEMU patch management List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Amit Shah Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:31:21 +0530 Amit Shah wrote: > On (Thu) Sep 10 2009 [08:47:13], Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:38:04 +0530 > > Amit Shah wrote: > > > > > > - URL of staging tree > > > > > > Might help; but various developers might have their own staging trees > > > (as it now is). If things change in the future, this will have to be > > > modified. > > > > I think he's talking about Anthony's staging, which is the most > > important one for those submitting patches. > > Right; and what I mean is like Anthony has his own queue, others might > have theirs too. If something along the lines of what Avi suggested > (having branches in the qemu repo for staging) gets implemented, this > will have to be redone. Yes, the point is: if we have a central tree where patches are merged before going to master, the address of that tree should be listed somewhere. > > I might be wrong about this but, the Linux kernel way of having > > people maintaining subsystems didn't work out here yet. > > It can easily be done. The process has to scale considering the number > of submissions we're seeing. I agree, with more maintainers QEMU would evolve a lot faster and I think this is becoming an issue. On the other hand I don't think we will have them by distributing responsibilities, those interested should setup a tree and start collecting patches.