| Message ID | 1478772703-28185-7-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed > in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless > nowadays. Let's remove it. > > Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. > --- > MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- > 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ > F: tci.c > F: disas/tci.c > > -Stable branches > ---------------- > -Stable 1.0 > -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git > -S: Orphan > - > -Stable 0.15 > -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git > -S: Orphan > - > -Stable 0.14 > -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git > -S: Orphan > - > -Stable 0.10 > -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git > -S: Orphan > - > Block drivers > ------------- > VMDK > -- > 1.8.3.1 >
On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: >> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed >> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless >> nowadays. Let's remove it. >> >> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? > Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should be added and how it should look like. Thomas >> --- >> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- >> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 >> --- a/MAINTAINERS >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ >> F: tci.c >> F: disas/tci.c >> >> -Stable branches >> ---------------- >> -Stable 1.0 >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git >> -S: Orphan >> - >> -Stable 0.15 >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git >> -S: Orphan >> - >> -Stable 0.14 >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git >> -S: Orphan >> - >> -Stable 0.10 >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git >> -S: Orphan >> - >> Block drivers >> ------------- >> VMDK >> -- >> 1.8.3.1 >>
Quoting Thomas Huth (2017-01-10 01:54:40) > On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > >> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed > >> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless > >> nowadays. Let's remove it. > >> > >> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > > > > Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? > > Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. > > I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should > be added and how it should look like. Hmm, not sure how to make this very readable. Something like this perhaps? Stable branches --------------- Current M.(N-1) Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) S: Supported > > Thomas > > > >> --- > >> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- > >> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > >> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 > >> --- a/MAINTAINERS > >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > >> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ > >> F: tci.c > >> F: disas/tci.c > >> > >> -Stable branches > >> ---------------- > >> -Stable 1.0 > >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git > >> -S: Orphan > >> - > >> -Stable 0.15 > >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git > >> -S: Orphan > >> - > >> -Stable 0.14 > >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git > >> -S: Orphan > >> - > >> -Stable 0.10 > >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git > >> -S: Orphan > >> - > >> Block drivers > >> ------------- > >> VMDK > >> -- > >> 1.8.3.1 > >> >
Quoting Michael Roth (2017-01-10 10:34:29) > Quoting Thomas Huth (2017-01-10 01:54:40) > > On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > >> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed > > >> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless > > >> nowadays. Let's remove it. > > >> > > >> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> > > >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > > Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? > > > Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. > > > > I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should > > be added and how it should look like. > > Hmm, not sure how to make this very readable. Something like this > perhaps? > > Stable branches > --------------- > Current M.(N-1) Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) Heh, that's not even correct. Should be something like: Current M.N Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.8.0) M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.N S: Supported If that seems reasonable I'll send a proper patch. > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > S: Supported > > > > > Thomas > > > > > > >> --- > > >> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- > > >> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > >> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 > > >> --- a/MAINTAINERS > > >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > >> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ > > >> F: tci.c > > >> F: disas/tci.c > > >> > > >> -Stable branches > > >> ---------------- > > >> -Stable 1.0 > > >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git > > >> -S: Orphan > > >> - > > >> -Stable 0.15 > > >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git > > >> -S: Orphan > > >> - > > >> -Stable 0.14 > > >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git > > >> -S: Orphan > > >> - > > >> -Stable 0.10 > > >> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > >> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git > > >> -S: Orphan > > >> - > > >> Block drivers > > >> ------------- > > >> VMDK > > >> -- > > >> 1.8.3.1 > > >> > >
On 10/01/2017 17:34, Michael Roth wrote: > Quoting Thomas Huth (2017-01-10 01:54:40) >> On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed >>>> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless >>>> nowadays. Let's remove it. >>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> >>> >>> >>> Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? >>> Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. >> >> I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should >> be added and how it should look like. > > Hmm, not sure how to make this very readable. Something like this > perhaps? > > Stable branches > --------------- > Current M.(N-1) Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > S: Supported I would just say Stable branches --------------- Current Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org S: Supported Is the stable git tree used in practice, except in the days right before a release? Paolo >> >> Thomas >> >> >>>> --- >>>> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- >>>> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >>>> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >>>> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ >>>> F: tci.c >>>> F: disas/tci.c >>>> >>>> -Stable branches >>>> ---------------- >>>> -Stable 1.0 >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git >>>> -S: Orphan >>>> - >>>> -Stable 0.15 >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git >>>> -S: Orphan >>>> - >>>> -Stable 0.14 >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git >>>> -S: Orphan >>>> - >>>> -Stable 0.10 >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git >>>> -S: Orphan >>>> - >>>> Block drivers >>>> ------------- >>>> VMDK >>>> -- >>>> 1.8.3.1 >>>> >> > > >
Quoting Paolo Bonzini (2017-01-10 10:45:02) > > > On 10/01/2017 17:34, Michael Roth wrote: > > Quoting Thomas Huth (2017-01-10 01:54:40) > >> On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > >>>> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed > >>>> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless > >>>> nowadays. Let's remove it. > >>>> > >>>> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > >>> > >>> > >>> Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? > >>> Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. > >> > >> I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should > >> be added and how it should look like. > > > > Hmm, not sure how to make this very readable. Something like this > > perhaps? > > > > Stable branches > > --------------- > > Current M.(N-1) Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > > S: Supported > > I would just say > > Stable branches > --------------- > Current Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > S: Supported > > Is the stable git tree used in practice, except in the days right before > a release? Generally not on my end, but it's possible downstreams make use of them as a means to just grab the latest stable release (though I don't know if this is actually the case or not). I agree that having it in MAINTAINERS isprobably of limited usefulness though. I *would* like to have a fairly consistent tree that's updated more regularly that people could target for backports and such, but that would probably be via my stable-N.M-staging tree on github. Perhaps I should point people there instead? Unfortunately that still requires some amount of variable substitution. > > Paolo > > >> > >> Thomas > >> > >> > >>>> --- > >>>> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- > >>>> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > >>>> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 > >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS > >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > >>>> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ > >>>> F: tci.c > >>>> F: disas/tci.c > >>>> > >>>> -Stable branches > >>>> ---------------- > >>>> -Stable 1.0 > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git > >>>> -S: Orphan > >>>> - > >>>> -Stable 0.15 > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git > >>>> -S: Orphan > >>>> - > >>>> -Stable 0.14 > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git > >>>> -S: Orphan > >>>> - > >>>> -Stable 0.10 > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git > >>>> -S: Orphan > >>>> - > >>>> Block drivers > >>>> ------------- > >>>> VMDK > >>>> -- > >>>> 1.8.3.1 > >>>> > >> > > > > > > >
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:27:58AM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > Quoting Paolo Bonzini (2017-01-10 10:45:02) > > > > > > On 10/01/2017 17:34, Michael Roth wrote: > > > Quoting Thomas Huth (2017-01-10 01:54:40) > > >> On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > >>>> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed > > >>>> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless > > >>>> nowadays. Let's remove it. > > >>>> > > >>>> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? > > >>> Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. > > >> > > >> I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should > > >> be added and how it should look like. > > > > > > Hmm, not sure how to make this very readable. Something like this > > > perhaps? > > > > > > Stable branches > > > --------------- > > > Current M.(N-1) Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > > > S: Supported > > > > I would just say > > > > Stable branches > > --------------- > > Current Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > S: Supported > > > > Is the stable git tree used in practice, except in the days right before > > a release? > > Generally not on my end, but it's possible downstreams make use of them > as a means to just grab the latest stable release (though I don't know if > this is actually the case or not). I agree that having it in MAINTAINERS > isprobably of limited usefulness though. > > I *would* like to have a fairly consistent tree that's updated more regularly > that people could target for backports and such, but that would probably > be via my stable-N.M-staging tree on github. Perhaps I should point > people there instead? Unfortunately that still requires some amount of > variable substitution. Do you need multiple trees? Why not have branches? > > > > Paolo > > > > >> > > >> Thomas > > >> > > >> > > >>>> --- > > >>>> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- > > >>>> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) > > >>>> > > >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > >>>> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 > > >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS > > >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > >>>> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ > > >>>> F: tci.c > > >>>> F: disas/tci.c > > >>>> > > >>>> -Stable branches > > >>>> ---------------- > > >>>> -Stable 1.0 > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > >>>> - > > >>>> -Stable 0.15 > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > >>>> - > > >>>> -Stable 0.14 > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > >>>> - > > >>>> -Stable 0.10 > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > >>>> - > > >>>> Block drivers > > >>>> ------------- > > >>>> VMDK > > >>>> -- > > >>>> 1.8.3.1 > > >>>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
Quoting Michael S. Tsirkin (2017-01-10 11:43:24) > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:27:58AM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > > Quoting Paolo Bonzini (2017-01-10 10:45:02) > > > > > > > > > On 10/01/2017 17:34, Michael Roth wrote: > > > > Quoting Thomas Huth (2017-01-10 01:54:40) > > > >> On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > >>>> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed > > > >>>> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless > > > >>>> nowadays. Let's remove it. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? > > > >>> Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. > > > >> > > > >> I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should > > > >> be added and how it should look like. > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure how to make this very readable. Something like this > > > > perhaps? > > > > > > > > Stable branches > > > > --------------- > > > > Current M.(N-1) Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > > > > S: Supported > > > > > > I would just say > > > > > > Stable branches > > > --------------- > > > Current Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > S: Supported > > > > > > Is the stable git tree used in practice, except in the days right before > > > a release? > > > > Generally not on my end, but it's possible downstreams make use of them > > as a means to just grab the latest stable release (though I don't know if > > this is actually the case or not). I agree that having it in MAINTAINERS > > isprobably of limited usefulness though. > > > > I *would* like to have a fairly consistent tree that's updated more regularly > > that people could target for backports and such, but that would probably > > be via my stable-N.M-staging tree on github. Perhaps I should point > > people there instead? Unfortunately that still requires some amount of > > variable substitution. > > Do you need multiple trees? Why not have branches? Sorry, by "tree" I meant branch, e.g.: https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/tree/stable-2.7-staging https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/tree/stable-2.6-staging etc. Or were you suggesting something else? I don't think I can do something like a single stable-current-staging branch since there's often some overlap between stable releases for N and N-1 cycles, and the N branches aren't direct descendants of N-1 (not sure if that's what you were suggesting). > > > > > > > Paolo > > > > > > >> > > > >> Thomas > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>>> --- > > > >>>> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- > > > >>>> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) > > > >>>> > > > >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > > >>>> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 > > > >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS > > > >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > > >>>> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ > > > >>>> F: tci.c > > > >>>> F: disas/tci.c > > > >>>> > > > >>>> -Stable branches > > > >>>> ---------------- > > > >>>> -Stable 1.0 > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > >>>> - > > > >>>> -Stable 0.15 > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > >>>> - > > > >>>> -Stable 0.14 > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > >>>> - > > > >>>> -Stable 0.10 > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > >>>> - > > > >>>> Block drivers > > > >>>> ------------- > > > >>>> VMDK > > > >>>> -- > > > >>>> 1.8.3.1 > > > >>>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:17:26PM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > Quoting Michael S. Tsirkin (2017-01-10 11:43:24) > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:27:58AM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > > > Quoting Paolo Bonzini (2017-01-10 10:45:02) > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/01/2017 17:34, Michael Roth wrote: > > > > > Quoting Thomas Huth (2017-01-10 01:54:40) > > > > >> On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > >>>> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed > > > > >>>> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless > > > > >>>> nowadays. Let's remove it. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> > > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? > > > > >>> Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. > > > > >> > > > > >> I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should > > > > >> be added and how it should look like. > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure how to make this very readable. Something like this > > > > > perhaps? > > > > > > > > > > Stable branches > > > > > --------------- > > > > > Current M.(N-1) Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > > > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > > > > > S: Supported > > > > > > > > I would just say > > > > > > > > Stable branches > > > > --------------- > > > > Current Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > S: Supported > > > > > > > > Is the stable git tree used in practice, except in the days right before > > > > a release? > > > > > > Generally not on my end, but it's possible downstreams make use of them > > > as a means to just grab the latest stable release (though I don't know if > > > this is actually the case or not). I agree that having it in MAINTAINERS > > > isprobably of limited usefulness though. > > > > > > I *would* like to have a fairly consistent tree that's updated more regularly > > > that people could target for backports and such, but that would probably > > > be via my stable-N.M-staging tree on github. Perhaps I should point > > > people there instead? Unfortunately that still requires some amount of > > > variable substitution. > > > > Do you need multiple trees? Why not have branches? > > Sorry, by "tree" I meant branch, e.g.: > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/tree/stable-2.7-staging > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/tree/stable-2.6-staging I would say T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) conveys that clearly. > etc. Or were you suggesting something else? > > I don't think I can do something like a single stable-current-staging > branch since there's often some overlap between stable releases for N > and N-1 cycles, and the N branches aren't direct descendants of N-1 > (not sure if that's what you were suggesting). > > > > > > > > > > > Paolo > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> Thomas > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>>> --- > > > > >>>> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- > > > > >>>> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > > > >>>> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 > > > > >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS > > > > >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > > > >>>> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ > > > > >>>> F: tci.c > > > > >>>> F: disas/tci.c > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> -Stable branches > > > > >>>> ---------------- > > > > >>>> -Stable 1.0 > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > >>>> - > > > > >>>> -Stable 0.15 > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > >>>> - > > > > >>>> -Stable 0.14 > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > >>>> - > > > > >>>> -Stable 0.10 > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > >>>> - > > > > >>>> Block drivers > > > > >>>> ------------- > > > > >>>> VMDK > > > > >>>> -- > > > > >>>> 1.8.3.1 > > > > >>>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Quoting Michael S. Tsirkin (2017-01-10 13:28:44) > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:17:26PM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > > Quoting Michael S. Tsirkin (2017-01-10 11:43:24) > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:27:58AM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > > > > Quoting Paolo Bonzini (2017-01-10 10:45:02) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/01/2017 17:34, Michael Roth wrote: > > > > > > Quoting Thomas Huth (2017-01-10 01:54:40) > > > > > >> On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > >>>> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed > > > > > >>>> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless > > > > > >>>> nowadays. Let's remove it. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> > > > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? > > > > > >>> Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should > > > > > >> be added and how it should look like. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure how to make this very readable. Something like this > > > > > > perhaps? > > > > > > > > > > > > Stable branches > > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > Current M.(N-1) Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > > > > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > > > > > > S: Supported > > > > > > > > > > I would just say > > > > > > > > > > Stable branches > > > > > --------------- > > > > > Current Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > > > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > S: Supported > > > > > > > > > > Is the stable git tree used in practice, except in the days right before > > > > > a release? > > > > > > > > Generally not on my end, but it's possible downstreams make use of them > > > > as a means to just grab the latest stable release (though I don't know if > > > > this is actually the case or not). I agree that having it in MAINTAINERS > > > > isprobably of limited usefulness though. > > > > > > > > I *would* like to have a fairly consistent tree that's updated more regularly > > > > that people could target for backports and such, but that would probably > > > > be via my stable-N.M-staging tree on github. Perhaps I should point > > > > people there instead? Unfortunately that still requires some amount of > > > > variable substitution. > > > > > > Do you need multiple trees? Why not have branches? > > > > Sorry, by "tree" I meant branch, e.g.: > > > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/tree/stable-2.7-staging > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/tree/stable-2.6-staging > > I would say > > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > > conveys that clearly. Agreed as far as the formatting, but thinking more on Paolo's query I'm not sure the qemu.org branch is preferrable over my staging tree on github. The main issue is that I generally only update the qemu.org branches as part of the actual releases, whereas my staging tree is updated a bit more regularly (and in that sense more akin to the various other development trees referenced in MAINTAINERS). I don't use the git.qemu.org stable branches for staging because I regularly force-push prior to release to handle reverts/fixes to avoid diverting too much from x.y.0 with various fix-up patches from my end, and exposing that part of the process doesn't really sit well with me for an "official" stable branch where I think there's some implied expectation of stability (for both code and history). I also don't really like the idea of force-pushing anything to git.qemu.org in general as it seems like somewhat of a liability. Would it be appropriate to reference 2 trees? T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.N (releases only) T: git git://github.com/mdroth/qemu.git stable-M.N-staging > > > > etc. Or were you suggesting something else? > > > > I don't think I can do something like a single stable-current-staging > > branch since there's often some overlap between stable releases for N > > and N-1 cycles, and the N branches aren't direct descendants of N-1 > > (not sure if that's what you were suggesting). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Paolo > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Thomas > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>>> --- > > > > > >>>> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- > > > > > >>>> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > > > > >>>> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 > > > > > >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS > > > > > >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > > > > >>>> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ > > > > > >>>> F: tci.c > > > > > >>>> F: disas/tci.c > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> -Stable branches > > > > > >>>> ---------------- > > > > > >>>> -Stable 1.0 > > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git > > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > > >>>> - > > > > > >>>> -Stable 0.15 > > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git > > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > > >>>> - > > > > > >>>> -Stable 0.14 > > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git > > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > > >>>> - > > > > > >>>> -Stable 0.10 > > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git > > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > > >>>> - > > > > > >>>> Block drivers > > > > > >>>> ------------- > > > > > >>>> VMDK > > > > > >>>> -- > > > > > >>>> 1.8.3.1 > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 02:18:45PM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > Quoting Michael S. Tsirkin (2017-01-10 13:28:44) > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:17:26PM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > > > Quoting Michael S. Tsirkin (2017-01-10 11:43:24) > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:27:58AM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > > > > > Quoting Paolo Bonzini (2017-01-10 10:45:02) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/01/2017 17:34, Michael Roth wrote: > > > > > > > Quoting Thomas Huth (2017-01-10 01:54:40) > > > > > > >> On 10.01.2017 04:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > > >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:11:43AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > > >>>> There are only very old and orphaned stable branches listed > > > > > > >>>> in the MAINTAINERS file - so this section is pretty useless > > > > > > >>>> nowadays. Let's remove it. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> > > > > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> Could you add some kind of entry for stable though? > > > > > > >>> Otherwise people won't know which address to CC. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> I think that's a question to Michael Roth - whether such an entry should > > > > > > >> be added and how it should look like. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure how to make this very readable. Something like this > > > > > > > perhaps? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stable branches > > > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > > Current M.(N-1) Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > > > > > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > > > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > > > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > > > > > > > S: Supported > > > > > > > > > > > > I would just say > > > > > > > > > > > > Stable branches > > > > > > --------------- > > > > > > Current Stable Branch (e.g. v2.8 if latest M.N.0 release was v2.9.0) > > > > > > M: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > > > L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > > S: Supported > > > > > > > > > > > > Is the stable git tree used in practice, except in the days right before > > > > > > a release? > > > > > > > > > > Generally not on my end, but it's possible downstreams make use of them > > > > > as a means to just grab the latest stable release (though I don't know if > > > > > this is actually the case or not). I agree that having it in MAINTAINERS > > > > > isprobably of limited usefulness though. > > > > > > > > > > I *would* like to have a fairly consistent tree that's updated more regularly > > > > > that people could target for backports and such, but that would probably > > > > > be via my stable-N.M-staging tree on github. Perhaps I should point > > > > > people there instead? Unfortunately that still requires some amount of > > > > > variable substitution. > > > > > > > > Do you need multiple trees? Why not have branches? > > > > > > Sorry, by "tree" I meant branch, e.g.: > > > > > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/tree/stable-2.7-staging > > > https://github.com/mdroth/qemu/tree/stable-2.6-staging > > > > I would say > > > > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.(N-1) > > > > conveys that clearly. > > Agreed as far as the formatting, but thinking more on Paolo's query I'm not > sure the qemu.org branch is preferrable over my staging tree on github. > > The main issue is that I generally only update the qemu.org branches as > part of the actual releases, whereas my staging tree is updated a bit > more regularly (and in that sense more akin to the various other > development trees referenced in MAINTAINERS). > > I don't use the git.qemu.org stable branches for staging because I regularly > force-push prior to release to handle reverts/fixes to avoid diverting too > much from x.y.0 with various fix-up patches from my end, and exposing that > part of the process doesn't really sit well with me for an "official" stable > branch where I think there's some implied expectation of stability (for both > code and history). I also don't really like the idea of force-pushing anything > to git.qemu.org in general as it seems like somewhat of a liability. > > Would it be appropriate to reference 2 trees? > > T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu.git stable-M.N (releases only) > T: git git://github.com/mdroth/qemu.git stable-M.N-staging I don't think it matters, just reference what's the most updated one. > > > > > > > etc. Or were you suggesting something else? > > > > > > I don't think I can do something like a single stable-current-staging > > > branch since there's often some overlap between stable releases for N > > > and N-1 cycles, and the N branches aren't direct descendants of N-1 > > > (not sure if that's what you were suggesting). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Paolo > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Thomas > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>>> --- > > > > > > >>>> MAINTAINERS | 22 ---------------------- > > > > > > >>>> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-) > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > > > > > >>>> index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 > > > > > > >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS > > > > > > >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > > > > > >>>> @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ > > > > > > >>>> F: tci.c > > > > > > >>>> F: disas/tci.c > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> -Stable branches > > > > > > >>>> ---------------- > > > > > > >>>> -Stable 1.0 > > > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git > > > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > > > >>>> - > > > > > > >>>> -Stable 0.15 > > > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git > > > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > > > >>>> - > > > > > > >>>> -Stable 0.14 > > > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git > > > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > > > >>>> - > > > > > > >>>> -Stable 0.10 > > > > > > >>>> -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org > > > > > > >>>> -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git > > > > > > >>>> -S: Orphan > > > > > > >>>> - > > > > > > >>>> Block drivers > > > > > > >>>> ------------- > > > > > > >>>> VMDK > > > > > > >>>> -- > > > > > > >>>> 1.8.3.1 > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index d8575ab..4a60579 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -1574,28 +1574,6 @@ F: tcg/tci/ F: tci.c F: disas/tci.c -Stable branches ---------------- -Stable 1.0 -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-1.0.git -S: Orphan - -Stable 0.15 -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.15.git -S: Orphan - -Stable 0.14 -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.14.git -S: Orphan - -Stable 0.10 -L: qemu-stable@nongnu.org -T: git git://git.qemu-project.org/qemu-stable-0.10.git -S: Orphan - Block drivers ------------- VMDK