qemu-stable
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-stable] Patch Release for Qemu 3.0 and/or 3.1?


From: Michael Roth
Subject: Re: [Qemu-stable] Patch Release for Qemu 3.0 and/or 3.1?
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 09:46:40 -0600
User-agent: alot/0.7

Quoting Peter Lieven (2019-03-04 07:24:12)
> 
> 
> > Am 04.03.2019 um 13:59 schrieb Michael Roth <address@hidden>:
> > 
> > Quoting Ilya Maximets (2019-03-04 04:15:20)
> >> Hi Peter,
> >> 
> >> I'm also interested in this topic, so I wanted to ask if you found the 
> >> answer?
> >> 
> >> There are still no stable branches for 3.0 and 3.1 in a repo.
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Sorry for the delay. The 3.0.1/3.1.1 releases should go out this month.
> > 
> > Normally 3.0.1 would've been released by now, but due to various delays
> > it's quite a bit behind.
> > 
> > 3.1.1 is on target for normal release (within 3-4 months of 3.1.0
> > depending on what the patch queue looks like).
> > 
> 
> Hi Michael,
> 
> thanks for the update. If you need help preparing the stable releases, please 
> let me know.
> 
> Are there any plans to make sth like an LTS release?

In general the stable release window for a particular major release only
lasts until around the time subsequent major release is made available,
at which point we switch to supporting the new/current release.

We've discussed in the past how to handle LTS, but I don't think we ever
laid out a complete process for that. I think it boils down to allowing
a contributor with an interest in a particular release to volunteer to
handle LTS support for it. If we have a volunteer for such a thing I could
handle pull requests/publishing for them as we work out the logistics
though.

> 
> Thanks,
> Peter
> 
> >> 
> >> Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
> >> 
> >>> Hi,
> >>> 
> >>> i noticed that there were no official point release for 3.0 and 3.1. The 
> >>> last 
> >>> release
> >>> 
> >>> that got a point release was 2.12. Was there a change in strategy?
> >>> 
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Peter
> >> 
> 
> 



reply via email to

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