Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release

[Jason Lowe-Power]

Hi all,

Could someone actually do this? I don't have permission (or know how) to
manage the repositories.

Alternatively, someone could give me access, and I can figure it out and
take care of it ;).

Thanks,
Jason

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 9:34 AM Pierre-Yves Péneau <
pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr> wrote:

> I am glad to see that my email leads to quick response and action :-)
>
> Thank you all.
>
>
>
> On 10/07/2016 04:04 PM, Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
>
> > Thanks for getting back to me everyone. I'm going to send out a message
> to
>
> > gem5-users to make sure there are no other objections. If there's nothing
>
> > in about a week, we should shut down gem5-stable.
>
> >
>
> > Who knows how to do this / has the access to do it? I don't.
>
> >
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > Jason
>
> >
>
> > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:59 AM Andreas Sandberg <
> andreas.sandb...@arm.com>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> +1 for #1 from me as well.
>
> >>
>
> >> Ideally, I’d like to see #3, but I don’t think we can make that work at
>
> >> the moment.
>
> >>
>
> >> //Andreas
>
> >>
>
> >> On 03/10/2016, 01:06, "gem5-dev on behalf of Steve Reinhardt" <
>
> >> gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org> on behalf
> of
>
> >> ste...@gmail.com<mailto:ste...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> I agree with #1. The existence of gem5-stable is just confusing, since
> we
>
> >> don't have a good process to keep it up-to-date.
>
> >>
>
> >> Steve
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:56 AM Beckmann, Brad <brad.beckm...@amd.com
>
> >> <mailto:brad.beckm...@amd.com>>
>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> I strongly support 1 as well.
>
> >>
>
> >> Brad
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> -Original Message-
>
> >> From: gem5-dev [mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org] On Behalf Of Andreas
>
> >> Hansson
>
> >> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 7:03 AM
>
> >> To: gem5 Developer List <gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>>
>
> >> Subject: Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release
>
> >>
>
> >> Hi Jason,
>
> >>
>
> >> I support 1 for now (based on example the argument you mention). Once we
>
> >> have moved to git we can reconsider.
>
> >>
>
> >> Andreas
>
> >>
>
> >> On 30/09/2016, 15:00, "gem5-dev on behalf of Jason Lowe-Power"
>
> >> <gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org> on behalf
> of
>
> >> ja...@lowepower.com<mailto:ja...@lowepower.com>> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>> Thanks for bringing this up. It's been a long time since we've
>
> >>> discussed gem5-stable on the mailing list.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> I propose that we come up with a few options on what we, as a
>
> >>> community, want to do with gem5-stable, vote on them, and then stick to
>
> >> our decision.
>
> >>> Below is what I see are the options. If anyone else has other ideas,
>
> >>> please chime in!
>
> >>>
>
> >>> 1. Get rid of gem5-stable.
>
> >>> 2. Continue with the previous approach of tagging gem5 every quarter
>
> >>> and releasing a gem5-stable branch.
>
> >>> 3. Develop a process of milestones and release after each milestone is
>
> >>> complete. Between milestone releases, we can backport bugfixes into
>
> >>> gem5-stable.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> My opinions:
>
> >>> 1. gem5-stable is no more bug-free than gem5-dev. It's only "stable" in
>
> >>> the sense that we never commit to it. *I think this is what we should
>
> >>> do for
>
> >>> now.*
>
> >>> 2. I don't think that the previous gem5-stable approach of tagging gem5
>
> >>> quarterly provides any added benefit. Users can just as easily clone
>
> >>> gem5-dev and just not update if they want a "stable" platform. That's
>
> >>> all gem5-stable was anyway.
>
> >>> 3. I think having milestones and true "releases" would be the best
>
> >>> thing we can do. However, I don't think we are currently at a place
>
> >>> where w

Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release

[Pierre-Yves Péneau]

I am glad to see that my email leads to quick response and action :-)
Thank you all.

On 10/07/2016 04:04 PM, Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
> Thanks for getting back to me everyone. I'm going to send out a message to
> gem5-users to make sure there are no other objections. If there's nothing
> in about a week, we should shut down gem5-stable.
> 
> Who knows how to do this / has the access to do it? I don't.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jason
> 
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:59 AM Andreas Sandberg <andreas.sandb...@arm.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> +1 for #1 from me as well.
>>
>> Ideally, I’d like to see #3, but I don’t think we can make that work at
>> the moment.
>>
>> //Andreas
>>
>> On 03/10/2016, 01:06, "gem5-dev on behalf of Steve Reinhardt" <
>> gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org> on behalf of
>> ste...@gmail.com<mailto:ste...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I agree with #1. The existence of gem5-stable is just confusing, since we
>> don't have a good process to keep it up-to-date.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:56 AM Beckmann, Brad <brad.beckm...@amd.com
>> <mailto:brad.beckm...@amd.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I strongly support 1 as well.
>>
>> Brad
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-
>> From: gem5-dev [mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org] On Behalf Of Andreas
>> Hansson
>> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 7:03 AM
>> To: gem5 Developer List <gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release
>>
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> I support 1 for now (based on example the argument you mention). Once we
>> have moved to git we can reconsider.
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>> On 30/09/2016, 15:00, "gem5-dev on behalf of Jason Lowe-Power"
>> <gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org> on behalf of
>> ja...@lowepower.com<mailto:ja...@lowepower.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for bringing this up. It's been a long time since we've
>>> discussed gem5-stable on the mailing list.
>>>
>>> I propose that we come up with a few options on what we, as a
>>> community, want to do with gem5-stable, vote on them, and then stick to
>> our decision.
>>> Below is what I see are the options. If anyone else has other ideas,
>>> please chime in!
>>>
>>> 1. Get rid of gem5-stable.
>>> 2. Continue with the previous approach of tagging gem5 every quarter
>>> and releasing a gem5-stable branch.
>>> 3. Develop a process of milestones and release after each milestone is
>>> complete. Between milestone releases, we can backport bugfixes into
>>> gem5-stable.
>>>
>>> My opinions:
>>> 1. gem5-stable is no more bug-free than gem5-dev. It's only "stable" in
>>> the sense that we never commit to it. *I think this is what we should
>>> do for
>>> now.*
>>> 2. I don't think that the previous gem5-stable approach of tagging gem5
>>> quarterly provides any added benefit. Users can just as easily clone
>>> gem5-dev and just not update if they want a "stable" platform. That's
>>> all gem5-stable was anyway.
>>> 3. I think having milestones and true "releases" would be the best
>>> thing we can do. However, I don't think we are currently at a place
>>> where we can implement this. If I'm wrong, and someone in the community
>>> wants to step up and take this responsibility, I think it would really
>>> benefit our users.
>>>
>>> What do other's think?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jason
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:24 AM Pierre-Yves Péneau <
>>> pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr<mailto:pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Since September 2015, gem5 has no stable version. However, a high
>>>> activity has been observed this year, and a lot of major features
>>>> have been added (big.LITTLE support, power modeling, new GPUs,
>>>> ElasticTraces etc..). I am wondering if there is any plan to release
>>>> a new stable version in the next weeks/months ?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> +-+
>>>> | Pierre-Yves Péneau - PhD student |  first.last at lirmm.fr  |
>>>> | LIRMM / CNRS - SYSMIC team   |   

Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release

[Jason Lowe-Power]

Thanks for getting back to me everyone. I'm going to send out a message to
gem5-users to make sure there are no other objections. If there's nothing
in about a week, we should shut down gem5-stable.

Who knows how to do this / has the access to do it? I don't.

Thanks,
Jason

On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:59 AM Andreas Sandberg <andreas.sandb...@arm.com>
wrote:

> +1 for #1 from me as well.
>
> Ideally, I’d like to see #3, but I don’t think we can make that work at
> the moment.
>
> //Andreas
>
> On 03/10/2016, 01:06, "gem5-dev on behalf of Steve Reinhardt" <
> gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org> on behalf of
> ste...@gmail.com<mailto:ste...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I agree with #1. The existence of gem5-stable is just confusing, since we
> don't have a good process to keep it up-to-date.
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:56 AM Beckmann, Brad <brad.beckm...@amd.com
> <mailto:brad.beckm...@amd.com>>
> wrote:
>
> I strongly support 1 as well.
>
> Brad
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: gem5-dev [mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org] On Behalf Of Andreas
> Hansson
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 7:03 AM
> To: gem5 Developer List <gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>>
> Subject: Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> I support 1 for now (based on example the argument you mention). Once we
> have moved to git we can reconsider.
>
> Andreas
>
> On 30/09/2016, 15:00, "gem5-dev on behalf of Jason Lowe-Power"
> <gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org> on behalf of
> ja...@lowepower.com<mailto:ja...@lowepower.com>> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for bringing this up. It's been a long time since we've
> >discussed gem5-stable on the mailing list.
> >
> >I propose that we come up with a few options on what we, as a
> >community, want to do with gem5-stable, vote on them, and then stick to
> our decision.
> >Below is what I see are the options. If anyone else has other ideas,
> >please chime in!
> >
> >1. Get rid of gem5-stable.
> >2. Continue with the previous approach of tagging gem5 every quarter
> >and releasing a gem5-stable branch.
> >3. Develop a process of milestones and release after each milestone is
> >complete. Between milestone releases, we can backport bugfixes into
> >gem5-stable.
> >
> >My opinions:
> >1. gem5-stable is no more bug-free than gem5-dev. It's only "stable" in
> >the sense that we never commit to it. *I think this is what we should
> >do for
> >now.*
> >2. I don't think that the previous gem5-stable approach of tagging gem5
> >quarterly provides any added benefit. Users can just as easily clone
> >gem5-dev and just not update if they want a "stable" platform. That's
> >all gem5-stable was anyway.
> >3. I think having milestones and true "releases" would be the best
> >thing we can do. However, I don't think we are currently at a place
> >where we can implement this. If I'm wrong, and someone in the community
> >wants to step up and take this responsibility, I think it would really
> >benefit our users.
> >
> >What do other's think?
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Jason
> >
> >
> >
> >On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:24 AM Pierre-Yves Péneau <
> >pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr<mailto:pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr>> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Since September 2015, gem5 has no stable version. However, a high
> >> activity has been observed this year, and a lot of major features
> >> have been added (big.LITTLE support, power modeling, new GPUs,
> >> ElasticTraces etc..). I am wondering if there is any plan to release
> >> a new stable version in the next weeks/months ?
> >>
> >> Thank you.
> >>
> >> --
> >> +-+
> >> | Pierre-Yves Péneau - PhD student |  first.last at lirmm.fr  |
> >> | LIRMM / CNRS - SYSMIC team   |+ 33 4 67 41 86 33
> <+33%204%2067%2041%2086%2033>|
> >> | Building 4 Office H2.2   |http://walafc0.org|
> >> +-+
> >> ___
> >> gem5-dev mailing list
> >> gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>
> >> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> >>
> >___
> >gem5-dev mailing list
> >gem5-dev@ge

Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release

[Andreas Sandberg]

+1 for #1 from me as well.

Ideally, I’d like to see #3, but I don’t think we can make that work at the 
moment.

//Andreas

On 03/10/2016, 01:06, "gem5-dev on behalf of Steve Reinhardt" 
<gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org> on behalf of 
ste...@gmail.com<mailto:ste...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I agree with #1. The existence of gem5-stable is just confusing, since we
don't have a good process to keep it up-to-date.

Steve


On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:56 AM Beckmann, Brad 
<brad.beckm...@amd.com<mailto:brad.beckm...@amd.com>>
wrote:

I strongly support 1 as well.

Brad


-Original Message-
From: gem5-dev [mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org] On Behalf Of Andreas
Hansson
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 7:03 AM
To: gem5 Developer List <gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>>
Subject: Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release

Hi Jason,

I support 1 for now (based on example the argument you mention). Once we
have moved to git we can reconsider.

Andreas

On 30/09/2016, 15:00, "gem5-dev on behalf of Jason Lowe-Power"
<gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org> on behalf of 
ja...@lowepower.com<mailto:ja...@lowepower.com>> wrote:

>Thanks for bringing this up. It's been a long time since we've
>discussed gem5-stable on the mailing list.
>
>I propose that we come up with a few options on what we, as a
>community, want to do with gem5-stable, vote on them, and then stick to
our decision.
>Below is what I see are the options. If anyone else has other ideas,
>please chime in!
>
>1. Get rid of gem5-stable.
>2. Continue with the previous approach of tagging gem5 every quarter
>and releasing a gem5-stable branch.
>3. Develop a process of milestones and release after each milestone is
>complete. Between milestone releases, we can backport bugfixes into
>gem5-stable.
>
>My opinions:
>1. gem5-stable is no more bug-free than gem5-dev. It's only "stable" in
>the sense that we never commit to it. *I think this is what we should
>do for
>now.*
>2. I don't think that the previous gem5-stable approach of tagging gem5
>quarterly provides any added benefit. Users can just as easily clone
>gem5-dev and just not update if they want a "stable" platform. That's
>all gem5-stable was anyway.
>3. I think having milestones and true "releases" would be the best
>thing we can do. However, I don't think we are currently at a place
>where we can implement this. If I'm wrong, and someone in the community
>wants to step up and take this responsibility, I think it would really
>benefit our users.
>
>What do other's think?
>
>Cheers,
>Jason
>
>
>
>On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:24 AM Pierre-Yves Péneau <
>pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr<mailto:pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr>> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Since September 2015, gem5 has no stable version. However, a high
>> activity has been observed this year, and a lot of major features
>> have been added (big.LITTLE support, power modeling, new GPUs,
>> ElasticTraces etc..). I am wondering if there is any plan to release
>> a new stable version in the next weeks/months ?
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> --
>> +-+
>> | Pierre-Yves Péneau - PhD student |  first.last at lirmm.fr  |
>> | LIRMM / CNRS - SYSMIC team   |+ 33 4 67 41 86 33|
>> | Building 4 Office H2.2   |http://walafc0.org|
>> +-+
>> ___
>> gem5-dev mailing list
>> gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>
>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>>
>___
>gem5-dev mailing list
>gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>
>http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
information in any medium. Thank you.
___
gem5-dev mailing list
gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
___
gem5-dev mailing list
gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

___
gem5-dev mailing list
gem5-dev@gem5.org<mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this

Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release

[Steve Reinhardt]

I agree with #1. The existence of gem5-stable is just confusing, since we
don't have a good process to keep it up-to-date.

Steve


On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:56 AM Beckmann, Brad <brad.beckm...@amd.com>
wrote:

> I strongly support 1 as well.
>
> Brad
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: gem5-dev [mailto:gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org] On Behalf Of Andreas
> Hansson
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 7:03 AM
> To: gem5 Developer List <gem5-dev@gem5.org>
> Subject: Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> I support 1 for now (based on example the argument you mention). Once we
> have moved to git we can reconsider.
>
> Andreas
>
> On 30/09/2016, 15:00, "gem5-dev on behalf of Jason Lowe-Power"
> <gem5-dev-boun...@gem5.org on behalf of ja...@lowepower.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for bringing this up. It's been a long time since we've
> >discussed gem5-stable on the mailing list.
> >
> >I propose that we come up with a few options on what we, as a
> >community, want to do with gem5-stable, vote on them, and then stick to
> our decision.
> >Below is what I see are the options. If anyone else has other ideas,
> >please chime in!
> >
> >1. Get rid of gem5-stable.
> >2. Continue with the previous approach of tagging gem5 every quarter
> >and releasing a gem5-stable branch.
> >3. Develop a process of milestones and release after each milestone is
> >complete. Between milestone releases, we can backport bugfixes into
> >gem5-stable.
> >
> >My opinions:
> >1. gem5-stable is no more bug-free than gem5-dev. It's only "stable" in
> >the sense that we never commit to it. *I think this is what we should
> >do for
> >now.*
> >2. I don't think that the previous gem5-stable approach of tagging gem5
> >quarterly provides any added benefit. Users can just as easily clone
> >gem5-dev and just not update if they want a "stable" platform. That's
> >all gem5-stable was anyway.
> >3. I think having milestones and true "releases" would be the best
> >thing we can do. However, I don't think we are currently at a place
> >where we can implement this. If I'm wrong, and someone in the community
> >wants to step up and take this responsibility, I think it would really
> >benefit our users.
> >
> >What do other's think?
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Jason
> >
> >
> >
> >On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:24 AM Pierre-Yves Péneau <
> >pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Since September 2015, gem5 has no stable version. However, a high
> >> activity has been observed this year, and a lot of major features
> >> have been added (big.LITTLE support, power modeling, new GPUs,
> >> ElasticTraces etc..). I am wondering if there is any plan to release
> >> a new stable version in the next weeks/months ?
> >>
> >> Thank you.
> >>
> >> --
> >> +-+
> >> | Pierre-Yves Péneau - PhD student |  first.last at lirmm.fr  |
> >> | LIRMM / CNRS - SYSMIC team   |+ 33 4 67 41 86 33|
> >> | Building 4 Office H2.2   |http://walafc0.org|
> >> +-+
> >> ___
> >> gem5-dev mailing list
> >> gem5-dev@gem5.org
> >> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> >>
> >___
> >gem5-dev mailing list
> >gem5-dev@gem5.org
> >http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
> information in any medium. Thank you.
> ___
> gem5-dev mailing list
> gem5-dev@gem5.org
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> ___
> gem5-dev mailing list
> gem5-dev@gem5.org
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>
___
gem5-dev mailing list
gem5-dev@gem5.org
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release

[Andreas Hansson]

Hi Jason,

I support 1 for now (based on example the argument you mention). Once we
have moved to git we can reconsider.

Andreas

On 30/09/2016, 15:00, "gem5-dev on behalf of Jason Lowe-Power"
 wrote:

>Thanks for bringing this up. It's been a long time since we've discussed
>gem5-stable on the mailing list.
>
>I propose that we come up with a few options on what we, as a community,
>want to do with gem5-stable, vote on them, and then stick to our decision.
>Below is what I see are the options. If anyone else has other ideas,
>please
>chime in!
>
>1. Get rid of gem5-stable.
>2. Continue with the previous approach of tagging gem5 every quarter and
>releasing a gem5-stable branch.
>3. Develop a process of milestones and release after each milestone is
>complete. Between milestone releases, we can backport bugfixes into
>gem5-stable.
>
>My opinions:
>1. gem5-stable is no more bug-free than gem5-dev. It's only "stable" in
>the
>sense that we never commit to it. *I think this is what we should do for
>now.*
>2. I don't think that the previous gem5-stable approach of tagging gem5
>quarterly provides any added benefit. Users can just as easily clone
>gem5-dev and just not update if they want a "stable" platform. That's all
>gem5-stable was anyway.
>3. I think having milestones and true "releases" would be the best thing
>we
>can do. However, I don't think we are currently at a place where we can
>implement this. If I'm wrong, and someone in the community wants to step
>up
>and take this responsibility, I think it would really benefit our users.
>
>What do other's think?
>
>Cheers,
>Jason
>
>
>
>On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:24 AM Pierre-Yves Péneau <
>pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Since September 2015, gem5 has no stable version. However, a high
>> activity has been observed this year, and a lot of major features have
>> been added (big.LITTLE support, power modeling, new GPUs, ElasticTraces
>> etc..). I am wondering if there is any plan to release a new stable
>> version in the next weeks/months ?
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> --
>> +-+
>> | Pierre-Yves Péneau - PhD student |  first.last at lirmm.fr  |
>> | LIRMM / CNRS - SYSMIC team   |+ 33 4 67 41 86 33|
>> | Building 4 Office H2.2   |http://walafc0.org|
>> +-+
>> ___
>> gem5-dev mailing list
>> gem5-dev@gem5.org
>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>>
>___
>gem5-dev mailing list
>gem5-dev@gem5.org
>http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any 
other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any 
medium. Thank you.
___
gem5-dev mailing list
gem5-dev@gem5.org
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Re: [gem5-dev] Stable release

[Jason Lowe-Power]

Thanks for bringing this up. It's been a long time since we've discussed
gem5-stable on the mailing list.

I propose that we come up with a few options on what we, as a community,
want to do with gem5-stable, vote on them, and then stick to our decision.
Below is what I see are the options. If anyone else has other ideas, please
chime in!

1. Get rid of gem5-stable.
2. Continue with the previous approach of tagging gem5 every quarter and
releasing a gem5-stable branch.
3. Develop a process of milestones and release after each milestone is
complete. Between milestone releases, we can backport bugfixes into
gem5-stable.

My opinions:
1. gem5-stable is no more bug-free than gem5-dev. It's only "stable" in the
sense that we never commit to it. *I think this is what we should do for
now.*
2. I don't think that the previous gem5-stable approach of tagging gem5
quarterly provides any added benefit. Users can just as easily clone
gem5-dev and just not update if they want a "stable" platform. That's all
gem5-stable was anyway.
3. I think having milestones and true "releases" would be the best thing we
can do. However, I don't think we are currently at a place where we can
implement this. If I'm wrong, and someone in the community wants to step up
and take this responsibility, I think it would really benefit our users.

What do other's think?

Cheers,
Jason



On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:24 AM Pierre-Yves Péneau <
pierre-yves.pen...@lirmm.fr> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Since September 2015, gem5 has no stable version. However, a high
> activity has been observed this year, and a lot of major features have
> been added (big.LITTLE support, power modeling, new GPUs, ElasticTraces
> etc..). I am wondering if there is any plan to release a new stable
> version in the next weeks/months ?
>
> Thank you.
>
> --
> +-+
> | Pierre-Yves Péneau - PhD student |  first.last at lirmm.fr  |
> | LIRMM / CNRS - SYSMIC team   |+ 33 4 67 41 86 33|
> | Building 4 Office H2.2   |http://walafc0.org|
> +-+
> ___
> gem5-dev mailing list
> gem5-dev@gem5.org
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>
___
gem5-dev mailing list
gem5-dev@gem5.org
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev