Ian Pratt wrote:
It's been over 6 weeks since the 3.0.0 release, and the -unstable tree
is actually looking pretty good right now -- two of the bugs I mentioned
yesterday are now fixed.
My current inclination is to call a 3.0.1 release Friday/Saturday and
sweep the tree into -testing. Monday morning we'd then incorporate hvm
and the 2.6.15 tree and work flat out to get that fully tested and
stabilized ASAP, so SuSE can pick it up for SLES10.
Agreed, I think this is fine.
SuSE have said they are actually going to base their release off 2.6.16,
even though we're still likely to be on 2.6.16-rcX by their freeze date.
One thing we could do to help them is to break with tradition and to
check the 2.6.16-rcX into the tree rather than the most recent stable
release, 2.6.15. This would help get 2.6.16 stabilized quicker, which
would certainly help them. 2.6.16 is already at rc1, which means that
Probably keeps us current for longer, so sounds reasonable.
many of the 'rough edges' should have been found, so I doubt we'll be
hurting ourselves too much. This is -unstable, after all.
What do other developers feel about trying to help SuSE out like this?
No doubt we might have to end up doing something similar for RH come the
RHEL5 freeze date. My feeling is that its in the xen community's
interest to have the best possible vendor releases, as the users always
end up coming to our mailing lists to complain :)
What do you think? Should we stick with 2.6.15 or go to 2.6.16-rc1 ?
I think going to 2.6.16-rc1 is a good idea..
Any reason not to call 3.0.1 now? There are a load of bug fixes and
improvements over 3.0.0.
Doing that now is fine. The emphasis as soon as that is done should
be to stabilize the new stuff incoming asap, so that a stable hvm,
upgraded linux kernel etc can be picked up by SLES10..i.e.
hopefully we can get a 3.0.2 out soon, too..
Our focus will continue to be hitting on xen-unstable as hard as
we can and fixing existing showstopper bugs there..
Xen-devel mailing list