2011/1/28 Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>: > On 01/28/2011 11:00 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote: >> >> 28.01.2011 11:06, Yoshiaki Tamura wrote: >> [] >>> >>> I would like Kemari to be included for 0.14. Thanks to many >>> valuable comments from various reviewers, it got better than >>> ever, I believe. For those who may object, it wouldn't affect >>> any functions including live migration unless one turns it on. >>> Besides, it is a good application of live migration. By having >>> merged, I would be able to focus on increasing functionality and >>> optimization. >> >> It's somewhat unexpected to see merge request for any new >> functionality into a "stable" branch. Having nothing bad >> against Kemari, I still think we shouldn't include any new >> functionality into 0.14, which were planned to be released >> before new year... ;) >> >> I mean, if it were not merged so far, for reasons that can >> be discussed separately etc, regardless of its good shape >> and so on... let's don't do any last-minute merges. > > To be fair to Yoshiaki, the first 17 patches in his 19-patch series have no > impact on the operation of QEMU, and even the last two are Kemari-only. I > know almost nothing about Kemari so I cannot comment on the technical side > of those patches, only that it w^Hshouldn't be destabilizing. I made some > comments on a couple of patches, so I'm inclined to say no as well.
I don't have any intention to destabilize qemu, so I'm happy to follow what people think appropriate. > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/91096 should be applied > in any case, as it is a regression from 0.12. Oops, I forgot to list it :) Thanks for catching. Yoshi > > Paolo > >