RE: [Xen-devel] RE: New Release Process

To:	"Matt Ayres" <matta@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	RE: [Xen-devel] RE: New Release Process
From:	"Ian Pratt" <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:40:13 -0000
Cc:	xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date:	Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:49:25 +0000
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	AcYjmAxsHg9IdjT6TUqrmuBGgRAuXwATXffA
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] RE: New Release Process

> Current -unstable will become 3.0.1, correct?  I am wondering 
> as the Novell guys' CFQ scheduler is turning out to be very 
> useful and with no troubles so far.  It'd be nice to get this 
> included in 3.0.1.

Yes. There's a lot of regression tests running on current -unstable at
the moment, but if users could give it a thorough kick-about too that
would be great.

We may sweep -unstable into -testing a day or two ahead of the 3.0.1
release so that work on -unstable can continue while we wait for a
couple of bug fix patches to get tested. (I'd really like to see the ip
checksum issue that effects some setups fixed in 3.0.1) 

Ian

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

RE: [Xen-devel] RE: New Release Process