From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55863) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b0leE-0006Ey-4H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 May 2016 04:07:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b0le9-0007mC-Pq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 May 2016 04:07:04 -0400 Received: from e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com ([195.75.94.112]:34824) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b0le9-0007lt-FR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 May 2016 04:07:01 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 12 May 2016 09:06:58 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.194]) by d06dlp01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C276917D8063 for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 09:07:52 +0100 (BST) Received: from d06av03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.213]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u4C86ta68651128 for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 08:06:55 GMT Received: from d06av03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d06av03.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id u4C86qXP008677 for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 02:06:54 -0600 Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 10:06:50 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20160512100650.3dcafe3a.cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <57343365.3020603@de.ibm.com> References: <1462812240-31204-1-git-send-email-aurelien@aurel32.net> <5730CE8B.1000203@weilnetz.de> <573387F9.8080304@de.ibm.com> <57343365.3020603@de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-mips: fix call to memset in soft reset code List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Christian Borntraeger Cc: Peter Maydell , Stefan Weil , Leon Alrae , QEMU Developers , Aurelien Jarno On Thu, 12 May 2016 09:40:21 +0200 Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Maybe a topic for this years QEMU summit could be to talk about > release process and release criterias. +1 to that. > We could > a: allow more patches , e.g. I thing that this patch would be have > been taken in the Linux kernel a day before the release, see for > example what is applied 4 days before a release as network fixes: > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=4d8bbbff1227bbb27fdb02b6db17f080c06eedad > 22 files changed, 258 insertions, 86 deletions Personally, I would probably go for something between applying this patch and that networking pull :) > b: as we are strict and only apply hand selected patches, regressions are > very unlikely, so we could release sooner. For example the CVE fixes could > have just been taken and rc5 being released as final. (which we did anyway > but 3 days later) > > c: we consider everything fine and keep the process > > d: better ideas One thing I've noticed is that softfreeze/early hardfreeze qemus often seem more unstable than versions earlier in the development cycle - probably because people panic and rush to get code in for the release. I don't know if stricter rules/enforcement of what is supposed to go in during softfreeze/hardfreeze would help here.