From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LUU3q-0006eJ-6v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 17:48:06 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LUU3n-0006e7-QH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 17:48:04 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39551 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LUU3n-0006e4-KD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 17:48:03 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f20.google.com ([209.85.221.20]:43161) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LUU3n-0006x5-A7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 17:48:03 -0500 Received: by qyk13 with SMTP id 13so4316551qyk.10 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2009 14:48:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4988C98D.9050808@codemonkey.ws> Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:47:41 -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> <4988BC3E.8080305@codemonkey.ws> <761ea48b0902031405u59c6dce2y8f7db73759dbaf0f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <761ea48b0902031405u59c6dce2y8f7db73759dbaf0f@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 10:50 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> Laurent Desnogues wrote: >> >>> 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. >> > > I agree we should not care now about targets that are not here anymore. > But things that are important for the community should be taken with > care (and arm linux user mode is certainly a very important target). > If someone is actively fixing it, then I'm perfectly happy to wait. If it's a known issue that noone is resolving, I don't think delaying a release helps anyone. However, documenting all of these things somewhere so that they are clearly visible may make it easier for someone to fix so the process of going through a release would probably be helpful in general. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Laurent > > >