From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56588) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XEEum-00017w-U0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 05:50:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XEEue-0001wK-Am for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 05:50:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1036) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XEEud-0001w1-Od for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 05:50:40 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 11:50:32 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20140804095032.GB7280@noname.str.redhat.com> References: <20140801164142.5291.7527@loki> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [ANNOUNCE] QEMU 2.1.0 is now available List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Michael Roth , QEMU Developers Am 02.08.2014 um 00:33 hat Peter Maydell geschrieben: > On 1 August 2014 17:41, Michael Roth wrote: > > On behalf of the QEMU Team, I'd like to announce the availability of > > the QEMU 2.1.0 release. This release contains 2200+ commits from 180 > > authors. > > > Thank you to everyone involved! > > Yep, thanks to everybody who helped get this one out of the door; > trunk is now re-opened for 2.2 development. > > If there's anything you think we should maybe try to do better or > differently next time round, now might be a good time to suggest it. > Personally I think it went reasonably well and I was happy with the > length of hardfreeze time. I agree, that seems to have been a good length for the freeze. It happened probably for the first time that in the end an RC was approaching and I simply didn't have any new patches to submit a pull request for. It feels a lot better when you don't have masses of last-minute fixes, but things actually stabilise a bit. > We should remember to ask for updates > of the message translations at rc0/rc1 time rather than having them > appear very late in the cycle, perhaps. That's a good point. Should we include it in a Planning/2.2 wiki page so we won't forget, or is there a better place for it? Kevin