Hello,
Anil Madhavapeddy, on jeu. 14 sept. 2017 15:38:54 +0100, wrote:
> On 13 Sep 2017, at 17:13, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> > Anil Madhavapeddy, on mer. 13 sept. 2017 11:11:03 +0100, wrote:
> >> Maintaining a forked MiniOS has been a multi-year source of a maintenance burden for MirageOS,
> >
> > I'm just wondering why this happened?
> >
> > The mini-os repository is open for development, it's just a matter of
> > agreeing on how to implement features :)
>
> We forked it well before mini-os spun out into a separate repository,
> around 5 years ago.
Ok :)
> It's a combination of both I think. I had a very quick look at the latest mini-os
> tree and ran into build problems from the master branch
Ok, so it's just a matter of cleanly working on it.
Samuel
_______________________________________________
Xen-api mailing list
Xen-api@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api
Anil Madhavapeddy, on jeu. 14 sept. 2017 15:38:54 +0100, wrote:
> On 13 Sep 2017, at 17:13, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> > Anil Madhavapeddy, on mer. 13 sept. 2017 11:11:03 +0100, wrote:
> >> Maintaining a forked MiniOS has been a multi-year source of a maintenance burden for MirageOS,
> >
> > I'm just wondering why this happened?
> >
> > The mini-os repository is open for development, it's just a matter of
> > agreeing on how to implement features :)
>
> We forked it well before mini-os spun out into a separate repository,
> around 5 years ago.
Ok :)
> It's a combination of both I think. I had a very quick look at the latest mini-os
> tree and ran into build problems from the master branch
Ok, so it's just a matter of cleanly working on it.
Samuel
_______________________________________________
Xen-api mailing list
Xen-api@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api