On 14/12/2015 10:49, Denis V. Lunev wrote: >> >> In any case, even if this is a bug that we want to add to 2.5.1, it's >> definitely too late for 2.5---at any time after soft freeze. > ok. 2.5.1 would be really great. Thank you for a prompt reply. > > Though I have a question about the freeze policy as > other people still accepting user-visible bugfixes > after a soft freeze.
Of course things are up to the individual maintainer but, in general, I think that guest-visible changes should be vetted very carefully after soft freeze. It depends on the effect of the change. Changing ACPI tables is quite more far reaching than, say, fixing an infinite loop in a device model (which has never been triggered so far, or we would have had a bug reported). Paolo
