From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Jackson Subject: Re: Xen 4.2 TODO / Release Plan Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:58:50 +0100 Message-ID: <20449.62266.471079.950707@mariner.uk.xensource.com> References: <1339506046.24104.30.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <4FD766E2020000780008974F@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <1339509935.24104.66.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <1340205929.4906.66.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <4FE20B23020000780008AE16@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <1340207407.4906.77.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1340207407.4906.77.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , Jan Beulich , Stefano Stabellini List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.2 TODO / Release Plan"): > This is really for Ian J to say but IMHO the two code bases have > diverged enough that blindly pulling from upstream -> traditional is not > a good idea, so at the least the change needs to be tested in that > context. Indeed. I would like someone to at least have looked at the automatic merge output from a cherry pick. Ian.