Or we could just use continuous integration where there are no freezes, just per change regression tests.
-Zach On 15 June 2011 11:17, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 15 June 2011 15:40, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pi...@linaro.org> wrote: >> On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> if we want to guarantee >>> that QEMU and the kernel work together I think we really >>> need to pretty much freeze the kernel two weeks before >>> QEMU's release date, in order to have a fighting chance >>> at catching and fixing problems. >> >> I don't think it is reasonable to freeze the kernel for two weeks in a >> ~4 week cycle. Therefore we might have to consider simply not having the >> same release dates for all components. We could pipeline the >> dependencies instead of being all synchronous. > > This would mostly work, although you'd end up with the > slightly odd effect that qemu-linaro released at the same > time as the rest of the toolchain components but nominally > as part of the previous month's release... > > -- PMM > > _______________________________________________ > linaro-kernel mailing list > linaro-ker...@lists.linaro.org > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-kernel > _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
