On Mon, 2017-09-11 at 15:16 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On 09/07/2017 10:54 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, George Dunlap wrote: > > > > > > +### Null Scheduler > > > + > > > + Status: Experimental > > > + > > > > > Can we say more than Experimental? I think it should be at least > > Tech > > Preview. > > I was going to wait for Dario to respond to this (I had just copied > what > was already there). Tech Preview should look like this: > > Functional completeness: Yes > Functional stability: Quirky > Interface stability: Provisionally stable > Security supported: No > > I think that's probably accurate. Dario? > Yes, I think 'Tech Preview' is ok.
Next step would be adding it to OSSTest, at which point, we can start to think about calling it supported. Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
