From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33209)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1XEHoP-00057r-7r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 08:56:31 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1XEHoJ-00051J-3u
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 08:56:25 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:25817)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1XEHoI-00050b-TL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 08:56:19 -0400
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 14:56:36 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20140804125636.GA17144@redhat.com>
References: <20140801164142.5291.7527@loki>
	<CAFEAcA_ChuX8AKq8-SuMjgOoJ_Fo0j1CgY=Ts11snaMjdSE2wQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA_ChuX8AKq8-SuMjgOoJ_Fo0j1CgY=Ts11snaMjdSE2wQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [ANNOUNCE] QEMU 2.1.0 is now available
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 11:33:28PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 1 August 2014 17:41, Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> 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. 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.
> 
> thanks
> -- PMM

I agree, if went well.

I already have some bugfix patches which would be
preferable on a stable branch rather than
make them wait for 2.2.

How about we schedule periodic 2.1.y updates?
I think this has a better chance to work than
the "whenever we feel this is a good idea" model
we tried previously.

-- 
MST