Eduardo Habkost writes:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 02:15:30PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Eduardo Habkost writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 07:59:47PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> >> Am 28.08.2012 16:27, schrieb Eduardo Habkost:
>> >> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 02:55:56PM +0100, Pet
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 02:15:30PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Eduardo Habkost writes:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 07:59:47PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> >> Am 28.08.2012 16:27, schrieb Eduardo Habkost:
> >> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 02:55:56PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> >> On 28 A
Eduardo Habkost writes:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 07:59:47PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> Am 28.08.2012 16:27, schrieb Eduardo Habkost:
>> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 02:55:56PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> >> On 28 August 2012 14:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>> >>> - 1.2 branching, or creation
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 07:59:47PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 28.08.2012 16:27, schrieb Eduardo Habkost:
> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 02:55:56PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> On 28 August 2012 14:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >>> - 1.2 branching, or creation of a "cpu-next" tree where "goo
Am 28.08.2012 16:27, schrieb Eduardo Habkost:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 02:55:56PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 28 August 2012 14:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>>> - 1.2 branching, or creation of a "cpu-next" tree where "good to be
>>> merged" patches can live until 1.2 is done;
>>
>> With 1.3
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 02:55:56PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 28 August 2012 14:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > - 1.2 branching, or creation of a "cpu-next" tree where "good to be
> > merged" patches can live until 1.2 is done;
>
> With 1.3 due for release in just over a week, it seems unl
On 28 August 2012 14:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> - 1.2 branching, or creation of a "cpu-next" tree where "good to be
> merged" patches can live until 1.2 is done;
With 1.3 due for release in just over a week, it seems unlikely
that it's worth branching at this point...
-- PMM
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 03:43:17PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:54:54AM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
> >
> > - *-user and qdev (recent RFCs didn't get many
Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:54:54AM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
>
> - *-user and qdev (recent RFCs didn't get many comments in the list, and
> I don't see a conclusion);
> - 1.2 branching, or
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:54:54AM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
- *-user and qdev (recent RFCs didn't get many comments in the list, and
I don't see a conclusion);
- 1.2 branching, or creation of a "cpu-next" tree where
10 matches
Mail list logo