2011/1/29 Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws>: > On 01/28/2011 07:33 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> 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. > > No, I'd prefer not to take Kemari before the 0.14 freeze. It gives us a > full release cycle for testing plus gives a nice headline feature for 0.15.
Sounds reasonable to me. I thought it might be forgotten unless I didn't raise my voice :) I'll keep up the pace to get it in once the development cycle is ready. Thanks, Yoshi >> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/91096 should be >> applied in any case, as it is a regression from 0.12. > > Thanks. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > > >> Paolo >> > > >