All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russell Pavlicek <russell.pavlicek@citrix.com>
To: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@citrix.com>,
	Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>George Dunlap
	<George.Dunlap@citrix.com>,
	Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@citrix.com>,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: Xen 4.4 development update: RC0 imminent
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:06:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55E78A57290FB64FA0D3CF672F9F3DA20F8803@SJCPEX01CL03.citrite.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52A0B223.70406@eu.citrix.com>

>That wasn't a yes/no question; it is a, "which do you think is best" question:

>* Announcing features for external projects (linux, libvirt) in the main Xen release.  Advantage: Longer list of features, more concentrated coverage

>* Announcing features for external projects when the external projects release.  Advantage: More frequent coverage, may build good-will between projects to announce their releases

My gut: do both.  Make noise in the Xen release, then make more noise when the external project releases.  Preface the second one with "as we previously indicated during the release of XXXX...".

News is news until people know about it.  We reach a very limited subset of the Open Source world with any piece of PR.  Exercising an opportunity to announce & announce again (under the guise of a reminder to people) is prudent, IMO.  We need to make lots of positive noise continually to overcome the existing market misconception that KVM is the future.

It's kind of like the old adage of voting in Chicago: "Vote early; vote often."  ;)

Russ Pavlicek
Xen Project Evangelist, Citrix Systems
Home Office: +1-301-829-5327
Mobile: +1-240-397-0199
UK VoIP: +44 1223 852 894

-----Original Message-----
From: George Dunlap [mailto:george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 12:05 PM
To: Lars Kurth; George Dunlap; Roger Pau Monne; xen-devel
Cc: Russell Pavlicek
Subject: Re: Xen 4.4 development update: RC0 imminent

On 12/05/2013 05:01 PM, Lars Kurth wrote:
>
>>> * Disk: indirect descriptors (in 3.11)
>>>    - ?
>> It's part of the "Xen ecosystem", and so it should be tested and 
>> announced.  It makes sense to me to announce developments that happen 
>> all together with Xen releases; we can make it clear that these are 
>> features in *external
>> projects* that happened during the Xen 4.4 *timeframe*.  The 
>> alternative would be to announce them when the other projects had a release; but I think that may be diluting the messaging a bit.
>>
>> In any case, if we don't announce them on Xen releases, we ought to pay attention and announce them when the projects do their release.
>>
>> Lars / Russ, any opinions here?
> That works

That wasn't a yes/no question; it is a, "which do you think is best" 
question:

* Announcing features for external projects (linux, libvirt) in the main Xen release.  Advantage: Longer list of features, more concentrated coverage

* Announcing features for external projects when the external projects release.  Advantage: More frequent coverage, may build good-will between projects to announce their releases

   -George

  reply	other threads:[~2013-12-05 20:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-05 16:09 Xen 4.4 development update: RC0 imminent George Dunlap
2013-12-05 16:29 ` George Dunlap
2013-12-05 16:34   ` Wei Liu
2013-12-05 16:39     ` George Dunlap
2013-12-05 16:48       ` Wei Liu
2013-12-05 16:59         ` Ian Campbell
2013-12-05 17:06           ` Wei Liu
2013-12-05 17:16             ` Ian Campbell
2013-12-05 17:34               ` Wei Liu
2013-12-05 17:53                 ` George Dunlap
2013-12-05 18:03                   ` Wei Liu
2013-12-06  9:27                     ` Ian Campbell
2013-12-06 10:51                       ` Wei Liu
2013-12-05 16:39   ` Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
2013-12-05 16:41     ` George Dunlap
2013-12-05 16:42   ` Roger Pau Monné
2013-12-05 16:51     ` George Dunlap
2013-12-05 17:01       ` Lars Kurth
2013-12-05 17:04         ` George Dunlap
2013-12-05 20:06           ` Russell Pavlicek [this message]
2013-12-05 23:54             ` Sander Eikelenboom
2013-12-06  9:39             ` Lars Kurth
2013-12-06 12:14             ` George Dunlap
2013-12-05 16:59   ` David Vrabel
2013-12-05 17:05     ` George Dunlap
2013-12-05 17:40       ` Dario Faggioli
2013-12-05 17:07     ` George Dunlap
2013-12-05 17:01   ` Olaf Hering
2013-12-05 17:06     ` David Vrabel
2013-12-05 17:32   ` Dario Faggioli
2013-12-06 13:30   ` Fabio Fantoni
2013-12-05 16:34 ` Andrew Cooper
2013-12-06  9:07   ` Jan Beulich
2013-12-06 13:07     ` George Dunlap
2013-12-06 14:58       ` Jan Beulich
2013-12-05 16:54 ` George Dunlap
2013-12-16 10:50   ` Lars Kurth

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=55E78A57290FB64FA0D3CF672F9F3DA20F8803@SJCPEX01CL03.citrite.net \
    --to=russell.pavlicek@citrix.com \
    --cc=George.Dunlap@citrix.com \
    --cc=lars.kurth@citrix.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.