ANNOUNCE: QEMU 0.10.0 stable branch
Hi,
I'd like to announce the creation of a QEMU stable branch based on the recent 0.10.0 release. You can access it via anonymous SVN via:
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
The stable branch will receive bug fixes from trunk until at least the next major release. If submitting a bug fix, please consider also testing the patch against stable and sending multiple patches if appropriate. Using a tag in the subject line like [STABLE] would also be helpful to indicate to the maintainers that a patch should be considered for the stable tree.
As the stable tree accumulates fixes, we'll make new stable releases from the tree.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Quoted 6 lines · Anthony Liguori
Hi,
I'd like to announce the creation of a QEMU stable branch based on the recent 0.10.0 release. You can access it via anonymous SVN via:
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
is it also available via git mirrors?
Signature · 4 lines
Ryan Harper Software Engineer; Linux Technology Center IBM Corp., Austin, Tx [email protected]
Quoted 11 lines · Ryan Harper
Quoted 6 lines · Anthony Liguori
Hi,
I'd like to announce the creation of a QEMU stable branch based on the recent 0.10.0 release. You can access it via anonymous SVN via:
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
is it also available via git mirrors?
Not yet. I was hoping hpa could add a git mirror on kernel.org...
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Quoted 3 lines · Anthony Liguori
Not yet. I was hoping hpa could add a git mirror on kernel.org...
Is this different from
http://git.kernel.org/?p=virt/qemu/qemu.git;a=summary
?
Signature · 2 lines
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
Hi,
Quoted 9 lines · Ryan Harper
Quoted 6 lines · Anthony Liguori
Hi,
I'd like to announce the creation of a QEMU stable branch based on the recent 0.10.0 release. You can access it via anonymous SVN via:
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
is it also available via git mirrors?
http://repo.or.cz/w/qemu.git?a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/svn/stable_0_10_0
FWIW the repo.or.cz mirror automatically fetches all branches.
Ciao,
Dscho
Quoted 10 lines · Anthony Liguori
Hi,
I'd like to announce the creation of a QEMU stable branch based on the recent 0.10.0 release. You can access it via anonymous SVN via:
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
The stable branch will receive bug fixes from trunk until at least the next major release. If submitting a bug fix, please consider also testing the patch against stable and sending multiple patches if appropriate. Using a tag in the subject line like [STABLE] would also be helpful to indicate to the maintainers that a patch should be considered for the stable tree.
As the stable tree accumulates fixes, we'll make new stable releases from the tree.
Will a stable release be called 0.10.0.1 or 0.10.1? (I'd prefer the latter)
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Quoted 5 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 4 lines · Anthony Liguori
Hi,
I'd like to announce the creation of a QEMU stable branch based on the recent 0.10.0 release. You can access it via anonymous SVN via:
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
The stable branch will receive bug fixes from trunk until at least the next major release. If submitting a bug fix, please consider also testing the patch against stable and sending multiple patches if appropriate. Using a tag in the subject line like [STABLE] would also be helpful to indicate to the maintainers that a patch should be considered for the stable tree.
As the stable tree accumulates fixes, we'll make new stable releases from the tree.
Will a stable release be called 0.10.0.1 or 0.10.1? (I'd prefer the latter)
I was thinking the later but am open to suggestion.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Quoted 8 lines · Anthony Liguori
Quoted 7 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 6 lines · Anthony Liguori
Hi,
I'd like to announce the creation of a QEMU stable branch based on the recent 0.10.0 release. You can access it via anonymous SVN via:
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
The stable branch will receive bug fixes from trunk until at least the next major release. If submitting a bug fix, please consider also testing the patch against stable and sending multiple patches if appropriate. Using a tag in the subject line like [STABLE] would also be helpful to indicate to the maintainers that a patch should be considered for the stable tree.
As the stable tree accumulates fixes, we'll make new stable releases from the tree.
Will a stable release be called 0.10.0.1 or 0.10.1? (I'd prefer the latter)
I was thinking the later but am open to suggestion.
In this case, the branch ought to be called stable_0_10, no?
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Quoted 2 lines · Avi Kivity
In this case, the branch ought to be called
stable_0_10, no?
That's not a bad idea if everyone agrees that 0.10.1 is good stable naming convention. I was hoping to have the first stable release about 2 weeks after the 0.10.0 release FWIW. There's already some good stuff in the stable tree.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Anthony,
Am 08.03.2009 um 17:12 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
Quoted 1 line
I was hoping to have the first stable release about 2 weeks after the 0.10.0 release FWIW. There's already some good stuff in the stable tree.
Could you please consider the configure patches for that release. They were intended to make it into 0.10.0 but are mostly still unreviewed.
Open issues in 0.10.0 include:
* undocumented command line switches
* $OS_CFLAGS ignored for some compile tests
* $CFLAGS ignored for compile tests
* L14N issues when grep'ing tool output
Thanks,
Andreas
Quoted 7 lines · Andreas Färber
Anthony,
Am 08.03.2009 um 17:12 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
Quoted 1 line
I was hoping to have the first stable release about 2 weeks after the 0.10.0 release FWIW. There's already some good stuff in the stable tree.
Could you please consider the configure patches for that release. They were intended to make it into 0.10.0 but are mostly still unreviewed.
Sure, but one of the patches was an [RFC] so another version is needed before it could be considered for review.
The other patch got some valid comments against it that still haven't been resolved. If you post newer versions, they can be considered for stable.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Quoted 12 lines
Open issues in 0.10.0 include:
* undocumented command line switches
* $OS_CFLAGS ignored for some compile tests
* $CFLAGS ignored for compile tests
* L14N issues when grep'ing tool outputThanks,
Andreas
I just wonder if 0.XX is a good name for a stable release. May is suggest to increase the major number (1.XX).
Quoted 16 lines
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Anthony Liguori
Sent: Sonntag, 08. März 2009 17:13
To: Avi Kivity
Cc: [email protected]; kvm-devel
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] ANNOUNCE: QEMU 0.10.0 stable branchQuoted 2 lines · Avi Kivity
In this case, the branch ought to be called
stable_0_10, no?That's not a bad idea if everyone agrees that 0.10.1 is good stable naming convention. I was hoping to have the first stable release about 2 weeks after the 0.10.0 release FWIW. There's already some good stuff in the stable tree.
Quoted 8 lines · Anthony Liguori
Quoted 2 lines · Avi Kivity
In this case, the branch ought to be called
stable_0_10, no?That's not a bad idea if everyone agrees that 0.10.1 is good stable naming convention. I was hoping to have the first stable release about 2 weeks after the 0.10.0 release FWIW. There's already some good stuff in the stable tree.
I think 0.10.1 makes perfect sense for next stable release name.
Regards,
Daniel
Signature · 4 lines
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
Will a stable release be called 0.10.0.1 or 0.10.1? (I'd prefer the latter)
I was thinking the later but am open to suggestion.
Definitely the latter. I think the branch is mis-named, it should be stable_0_10 (with 0_10_0, 0_10_1 etc tags for actual releases).
Paul
Quoted 10 lines · Paul Brook
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
Will a stable release be called 0.10.0.1 or 0.10.1? (I'd prefer the latter)
I was thinking the later but am open to suggestion.
Definitely the latter. I think the branch is mis-named, it should be
stable_0_10(with 0_10_0, 0_10_1 etc tags for actual releases).
This is my preference as well.
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Quoted 10 lines · Paul Brook
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
svn co svn://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/qemu/branches/stable_0_10_0
Will a stable release be called 0.10.0.1 or 0.10.1? (I'd prefer the latter)
I was thinking the later but am open to suggestion.
Definitely the latter. I think the branch is mis-named, it should be
stable_0_10(with 0_10_0, 0_10_1 etc tags for actual releases).
FWIW, I renamed the branch to stable_0_10.
Regards,
Anthony Liguroi
Quoted 2 lines
Paul
Quoted 4 lines · Dietmar Maurer
I just wonder if 0.XX is a good name for a stable release. May is suggest to increase the major number (1.XX).
It's not that stable....
Doug.
Quoted 2 lines · Dietmar Maurer
I just wonder if 0.XX is a good name for a stable release. May is suggest to increase the major number (1.XX).
I think you're confusing stability with features and completeness.
Paul
Quoted 1 line
I think you're confusing stability with features and completeness.
IMHO both stability is good and kvm/qemu has quite many features. Anyways,
it does not really matters if you prefer 0.XX (although it is quite uncommon
to use zero as major number for a software used by 10000 or more people).
- Dietmar
Quoted 3 lines · Dietmar Maurer
Quoted 1 line
I think you're confusing stability with features and completeness.
IMHO both stability is good and kvm/qemu has quite many features.
I guess it depends on what targets you're talking about. Don't forget qemu supports CPU other than x86 and also has various user mode implementations.
Laurent