From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:48906)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1RZ0Qv-00081Z-OV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 08:24:19 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1RZ0Qu-0007El-CA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 08:24:13 -0500
Message-ID: <4EE20BF7.5080707@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 07:24:07 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1323115683.6884.8.camel@fedora64.linuxtx.org>
	<4EE20546.5000601@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <4EE20546.5000601@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Qemu stable releases
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: Alon Levy <alevy@redhat.com>, qemu-stable@nongnu.org, "Justin M. Forbes" <jmforbes@linuxtx.org>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 12/09/2011 06:55 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> 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 stable
>> 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/

We don't have a clear EOL schedule for stable releases.  Historically, stable 
releases only lasted until the next release cycle so in by that logic, 0.15 is EOL.

Obviously, part of creating a regular cadence for stable releases and getting 
more people involved is to formalize this all quite a bit more.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> Andreas
>