From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KsIen-0003Vh-S8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:56:25 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KsIem-0003Us-51 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:56:25 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38541 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KsIel-0003Ul-Ud for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:56:24 -0400 Received: from el-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.162.177]:42343) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KsIel-000270-AZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:56:23 -0400 Received: by el-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id s27so566400ele.19 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:56:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5d6222a80810210756y6458606di6e023364a28a00f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:56:12 -0200 From: "Glauber Costa" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] release date of qemu 0.9.2? In-Reply-To: <48FDEC73.4000908@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <48FDD9DD.4010906@codemonkey.ws> <20081021143834.GA29344@networkno.de> <48FDEC73.4000908@codemonkey.ws> 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 On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Thiemo Seufer wrote: >> >> Anthony Liguori wrote: >> >>> >>> C.W. Betts wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>> >>>> When will qemu be given the status of 0.9.2? I was browsing the source >>>> code of the Qemu that ships with OpenSuSE and noticed that there are a lot >>>> of patches. It would probably be helpful if there was a release that >>>> didn't depend on GCC 4. >>>> >>>> Also, what targets still depend on dyngen? And is anyone working on >>>> porting them to TCG? >>>> >>> >>> A lot of previously supported hosts are no longer supported with TCG. I >>> would think adding those hosts would be more important than completing the >>> TCG conversion before cutting a new release. >>> >> >> I disagree. The most important hosts are supported, the other hosts >> were largely experimental anyway, and getting rid of dyngen / gcc3 >> is IMHO worth a release. >> > > 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. I believe there's a lot of users who grab the stable releases, but won't grab the development snapshots. So usually releasing official releases more often means more testing happening. I believe it's worthy. -- Glauber Costa. "Free as in Freedom" http://glommer.net "The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act."