Re: [Qemu-devel] release date of qemu 0.9.2?

["Glauber Costa" <glommer@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
<plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> wrote:
> On 09:51 Tue 21 Oct     , 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 agree with you I think that the kernel way of release is good and can be
> used for qemu

The kernel has too many -rcX , which I believe does not suit qemu well.
This is because of the size of the user and developer base. The merge window is
also something that we would have a hard time doing without a distribuited scm.

So, kernel + adaptations is fine.


-- 
Glauber  Costa.
"Free as in Freedom"
http://glommer.net

"The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act."