From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gordan Bobic Subject: Re: [Hackathon Minutes] Xen 4.4 Planning Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:30:32 +0100 Message-ID: References: <51B9D08E.4000905@xen.org> "\"" <51BAED4702000078000DE484@nat28.tlf.novell.com>" <51BB108002000078000DE528@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51BB108002000078000DE528@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Lars Kurth , George Dunlap , Alex Bligh , xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 11:45:52 +0100, "Jan Beulich" wrote: >>>> On 14.06.13 at 11:59, Lars Kurth wrote: >> I also wanted to add to the point that Alex has made on serious bugs >> in xen >> vs. kvm : this gets raised regularly by Xen users when I attend >> conferences. And I also heard a few times now that we appear to >> focus more >> on sexy features rather than the basics. This is relatively new >> though: the >> first time I noticed was towards the end of last year. Which does >> not mean >> that this is new: it may just mean that top issues/concerns that >> were >> frequently raised before (mainly trust in the future of the project) >> have >> disappeared. > > I'd really like to see examples of this - there ought to be quite a > few according to what you write, yet I don't seem to recall any > that got plainly ignored. Of course there are always bugs which > take longer than others to figure out and fix. Not a bug per se, but arguably a relatively important feature; does the lack of feature to pass multiple USB devices to domU count as an example of this? Gordan