[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Next 4.6.x stable release, numbering, qemu-tag
On 15/06/16 11:04, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 15.06.16 at 11:35, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 15/06/16 08:38, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> As said on IRC this morning, while I continue to by unconvinced of the >>> arguments, being the only one wanting to stick with 4.6.2 I'm not going >>> to argue any further on this - be it 4.6.3 then. The only thing I would >>> really like to ask is that this time (as should have happened in the first >>> place), before tagging respective trees, everyone please make sure >>> everything intended to be in the tree they're responsible for indeed is >>> there. I really want to be able to rely on everybody having their trees >>> (or parts thereof) under control. >> >> I think this is an unreasonable expectation -- how is someone supposed >> to know whether a new critical issue is going to be reported seconds >> after they sign and push the tag? It amounts to saying, "Please make >> sure there are no bugs in your tree." > > I certainly didn't mean that, and I think it is reasonably clear even > without me having said so explicitly that my expectation only applies > to already known items. After all (aiui) what we're talking about here > are not issues that showed up in the last minute, but just fell between > the cracks. > >> The version of qemu-xen that was tagged with 4.6 had been through >> several rounds of RCs, months of osstesting, and even through a slew of >> builds on Travis (which does build Ubuntu, but apparently just not the >> bleeding-edge version). I only happened to notice it as I was trying to >> get patches for raisin for 4.7. > > The mere fact that 4.6.0 and 4.6.1 exhibited the same issue (and, > from what you're saying now, which is different from what I've > understood before, already did when they were cut) would make > dealing with the issue a non-release-critical one for my taste. IOW, > if a new version of Ubuntu showed up after 4.6.1, then fixing the > issue in 4.6.2 (now 4.6.3) would indeed be rather desirable. If, > however, that release was around already at the time 4.6.1 got > cut, then I don't see why this is so urgent a problem to address. And this is exactly what happened -- the version of Ubuntu which breaks is 16.04, which (as the name indicates) came out in April 2016 -- two months after 4.6.1. :-) -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |