From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LUTAr-0005c3-O5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:51:17 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LUTAq-0005Zr-2G for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:51:17 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53272 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LUTAp-0005Zd-PH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:51:15 -0500 Received: from yx-out-1718.google.com ([74.125.44.152]:61170) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LUTAp-0002mz-DC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:51:15 -0500 Received: by yx-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 3so1053896yxi.82 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 13:51:15 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4988BC3E.8080305@codemonkey.ws> Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:50:54 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Cutting a new QEMU release References: <4988AD96.6090308@codemonkey.ws> <5d6222a80902031258m59691fach7077f516f9b078df@mail.gmail.com> <761ea48b0902031335t71922b13ne2a22baa38318698@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <761ea48b0902031335t71922b13ne2a22baa38318698@mail.gmail.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: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Laurent Desnogues wrote: > On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Glauber Costa wrote: > >> I'm totally for it. >> > > So am I, but who will test user mode and more generally (user and system) > what is the test procedure? > I'd like to approach this gently. Historically, there's been no formal release process. I'm not inclined to start out by introducing any sort of heavy weight procedure. I'll poke things as best I can over the next couple weeks. I encourage everyone else to do the same. I'll keep track of what's working and what's broken and make it available publicly. At some point, we can decide as if things are too embarrassing to release or not :-) > For instance someone (Andzrej?) mentionned ARM in system mode is half > slower than it was before TCG. Also the ARM target needs some fixing. > > Perhaps doing at least one release candidate to get feedback (and focus on > fixing reported bugs) would be appropriate. > A release doesn't have to be perfect to be useful. I think what matters most is whether something is likely to be fixed in the reasonably near future. We're going to have some regressions compared to 0.9.1. There are a number of platforms that are no longer supported (ia64 and s390, for instance) but we could wait another year and I doubt these features would appear. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Cheers, > > Laurent > > >