From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KsJ6X-0003yD-PG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:25:05 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KsJ6W-0003xk-8G
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:25:05 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57804 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KsJ6W-0003xf-3Q
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:25:04 -0400
Received: from mail-gx0-f19.google.com ([209.85.217.19]:45606)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1KsJ6V-0001Zh-Lj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:25:03 -0400
Received: by gxk12 with SMTP id 12so5533364gxk.10
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 08:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <48FDF44A.2010302@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:24:58 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] release date of qemu 0.9.2?
References: <BAY110-DAV368495AFEC122115C5BA7B92E0@phx.gbl>
	<20081021143834.GA29344@networkno.de>
	<48FDEC73.4000908@codemonkey.ws>
	<200810211610.44261.paul@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <200810211610.44261.paul@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Paul Brook wrote:
>> Personally, I'd like to see much more frequent releases (every 3-6
>> months).  I'm okay with not having complete features (like the
>> dyngen->TCG conversion) or host regressions because I think there's
>> value in having releases regularly compared to feature based releases.
>>
>> What do other people think?  I'd be willing to do the leg work of releases.
>>     
>
> Cutting releases is the easy. Making sure the tree is in a suitable state to 
> be released is the hard bit.  Releases without good quality control are IMHO 
> pointless.
>   

Yeah, what I meant by leg work was doing deep testing and nagging people 
to fix things up before a release.  Cutting a release is very simple.

> Given the speed of qemu development, I think 3 months is way too short for a 
> release cycle.  You may as well just have everyone pull from SVN.
>   

How do you feel about 6 months?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Paul
>