From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40620) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bpViW-0003bo-Pp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 03:25:23 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bpViU-0003Uz-8r for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 03:25:15 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35170) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bpViU-0003UF-36 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 03:25:14 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 15:25:09 +0800 From: Fam Zheng Message-ID: <20160929072509.GA2432@lemon> References: <20160928180610.GA17246@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <1475132640.25046.13.camel@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1475132640.25046.13.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU 2.8 release schedule List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gerd Hoffmann Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , Peter Maydell , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paolo Bonzini On Thu, 09/29 09:04, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > > > Following previous discussions [1], the rules for the softfreeze will be > > changed in the QEMU 2.8 release cycle to bound the length of the freeze > > period better. > > > > Previously patch series posted on the mailing list prior to softfreeze > > could be included in maintainers' pull requests during softfreeze. > > Maybe we should call "softfreeze" simple "freeze" then to make things > more clear. Any features must land pull requests before freeze, period. > We don't really have a separate hard freeze any more: After (soft-) > freeze only bugfixes are allowed. +1. The new rule for softfreeze is already changing it to a "hard" one. Fam