On Thursday, January 18, 2018 at 11:25:11 AM UTC+1, Chris Laprise wrote: > If this Xen 4.6 patch were more robust in protecting memory, I'd opt for > it instead of upgrading Xen.
I believe that PVHs are more robust. But I'd prefer to stay conservative in Qubes 3.2 and progressive in Qubes 4.0. > As for extended 3.2 support, I think this should be commuted to mean > "latest release from the 3.x series". You could release an upgrade as > either 3.3 or 3.2.5 for example, signifying a large bug fix. This would make sense if 3.3 is released and 3.2 is supported for standard 6mo. But I see the reason against it: It requires more work that could have been spent elsehow. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qubes-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to qubes-devel@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-devel/a1e69fd4-5fd5-4c4b-afcb-16f6f225026c%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
