From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51217) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZ00G-0000M4-81 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 07:56:42 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZ00C-0002Hd-3v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 07:56:40 -0500 Message-ID: <4EE20546.5000601@suse.de> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 13:55:34 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1323115683.6884.8.camel@fedora64.linuxtx.org> In-Reply-To: <1323115683.6884.8.camel@fedora64.linuxtx.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Qemu stable releases List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Justin M. Forbes" Cc: Markus Armbruster , Alon Levy , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-stable@nongnu.org Am 05.12.2011 21:08, schrieb Justin M. Forbes: > Typically I get a flurry of patches shortly after > a release (and they have already started for 1.0). I have tried to get > a .1 release out in a timely manner, and then it seems patches for > stable become few and far between. In the 0.14 and 0.15 series, not > even enough to warrant a .2 release. Perhaps this is due to lack fixed > issues, or lack of effort to submit to stable. > 3) Security fixes do not follow this schedule, and will trigger a stabl= e > release as needed. I would've thought that the usb-ccid CVE alone warrants a 0.15.2 of qemu and qemu-kvm. I am surprised nothing has happened there yet... http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/128064/ Andreas --=20 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=C3=BCrnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=C3=B6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=C3=BC= rnberg