All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Regarding "stable" kvm releases
@ 2011-02-03 14:59 Asdo
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Asdo @ 2011-02-03 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 'KVM-ML (kvm@vger.kernel.org)'

Hello list

I know qemu-kvm versions from sourceforge are the "stable" kvm releases.

So I went there hoping to find a version maintainance policy like that
of the linux kernel, that is, the last number in the release version is
the patch level.

Usually in linux I go hunting for the last kernel version which ends
with a .3 or higher, for production use, e.g. as of today I wouldn't
choose 2.6.37(.0) beacause .0 is not enough stable for a production
server imho, I would choose 2.6.36.3

I was trying to do the same with KVM but when I saw the changelogs I
realized that the stable kvm releases are not really stable in this sense.
E.g. in the 0.12.4 there are a helluva lot of changes which are feature
improvements (hence adding potential bugs), or so seems to me:
http://garr.dl.sourceforge.net/project/kvm/qemu-kvm/0.12.4/changelog

Am I correct? So there is no "maintenance line" in KVM where, after a
release with new features, you only add bugfixes for later point-versions?

So our likelihood of getting regression bugs is basically the same for
every qemu-kvm version; so we should just choose the latest qemu-kvm,
i.e. right now we should choose 0.13.0 instead of 0.12.5 ?

Thank you


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2011-02-03 15:00 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-02-03 14:59 Regarding "stable" kvm releases Asdo

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.