[libvirt] Release of libvirt-5.8.0

[Andrea Bolognani]

On Sun, 2019-10-06 at 20:48 +0200, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 06, 2019 at 03:22:12PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> > On 10/5/19 5:15 AM, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > >   So the only thing listed in the release notes is
> > > 
> > > Removed features:
> > > 
> > > - Remove xenapi driver
> > >    The xenapi driver is removed since it has not received any significant
> > >    development since its initial contribution nine years ago and has no
> > >    known user base.
> > > 
> > > Glancing at the commit list, there is a lot of refactoring going on
> > > which I assume don't have any visible user impact.

I think the actual reason is that, as usual, we've been pretty bad at
adding items to the release notes at the same time code changes are
merged, but unlike most other releases I've been too busy to pick up
the slack during freeze and nobody else has stepped up. I'll try to
do better next time, possibly by annoying people into adding release
notes updates to their series - the way it's supposed to work O:-)

> > > I would suggest users look at the new development strategy document,
> > >    https://libvirt.org/strategy.html
> > > 
> > > TBH since I started the project 14 or so years ago the core assumption
> > > have been kept, but this indicates willingness to change some of the
> > > directions by the current group of developers, one of the key point is
> > > articulated there:
> > > 
> > >   "There is thus a desire to make use of either Rust or Go, or a
> > > combination of both, to incrementally replace existing use of C,
> > > and also for greenfield development."
> > 
> > Is there any finer grained plan to this transition other than what is
> > already
> > mentioned in the strategy page? The text makes me believe that the use
> > of Rust/Go will be decided in a case by case scenario, as if it's something
> > that is going to be considered for newer features from now on, but
> > it's not like we're in a deadline to fully transition the code either - more
> > like a long term direction. Is that a fair understanding?
> 
>   That would be my understanding too, but I wasn't involved so hopefully
> someone else can confirm :-)

Correct, the document is intended to outline the long-term,
high-level development strategy rather than concrete efforts that
are underway.

-- 
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization