[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU 2.7 release schedule?

From: Michael Roth
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU 2.7 release schedule?
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2016 12:29:01 -0500
User-agent: alot/0.3.6

Quoting Alex Bennée (2016-06-07 02:29:38)
> Peter Maydell <address@hidden> writes:
> > Well, time to make a decision about our release date for 2.7.
> >
> > If you start out with "let's put the release in august like it
> > usually is but not so close to KVM Forum (24-26 Aug) as to
> > be likely to slip in to it", then you get something like:
> >
> > Jun 21 softfreeze
> > Jul 12 hardfreeze, rc0
> > Jul 19 rc1
> > Jul 26 rc2
> > Aug 02 rc3
> > Aug 09 final release 2.7.0
> >
> > That's with a 3-week softfreeze again, and puts softfreeze
> > in two weeks' time.
> Wow is it that time already, it feels like the tree only just opened up
> again. I guess that's the ever forward march of progress.

I think it is actually bit shorter of a window this time. The last few
releases had around 2.5 to 3 months between n-1 release and hard freeze / rc0
for n+1, but the proposed date would be just around 2 months.

Accounting for the possibility of an extra RC, more than 1 week more of
development time would make the possibility of the release pushing into
KVM Forum fairly likely.

But maybe an additional 1 week till soft freeze might be doable? I'm guessing
that doesn't make a big difference for something like MTTCG, but it could
be useful for others who didn't anticipate softfreeze being that close.

Being in late RC during KVM Forum also sounds like it could be productive,
but I'm not sure I'd want to be in that position if I was Peter...

> So from my point of view w.r.t to MTTCG I'm under no illusions about it
> being ready for the 2.7 window. In fact I think our current aim is to
> have the pieces in place so that we can hammer out the final details or
> merging at KVM Forum. However it would be good to get pre-cursor work
> merged in this window, QHT being the main thing which has had a number
> of rounds of review so far. We'll also review the current MTTCG patch
> sets to see what is ready and not directly tied to MTTCG to be brought
> forward for merging this window (a bunch of the TCG clean-ups have
> already gone in thanks to Sergey).
> >
> > Anybody got any better suggestions?
> Do you collect a list of baking features likely to go in or is it just a
> case of "patches have been on list by now"?
> >
> > thanks
> > -- PMM
> --
> Alex Bennée

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]