From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
kraxel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/i386: Deprecate the machines pc-0.10 to pc-0.15
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 18:15:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <157a6609-d75a-5d40-e5b9-c70802e40950@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ccb8fecd-e918-1cc0-28ef-af9865540fbc@redhat.com>
On 10/05/2017 16:47, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> So while we can delete pc-0.12, we can't delete associated features needed
>> by pc-0.12, without complicating RHEL's ability to create its back-compat
>> machine types. Downstream would have to un-delete the features.
>
> So I guess this is why Paolo said that pc-0.12 is still in "use" ... I
> think removing pc-0.12, but not removing rombar=0 will cause confusion
> in the upstream code base sooner or later,
I agree.
> so I guess we should rather
> keep the pc-0.12 machine until we can get rid of it together with the
> rombar code. We should still mark it as deprecated, of course.
>
>> I think tieing removal to major versions is a mistake, unless we're
>> going to set a fixed timeframe for delivery of major versions. ie if
>> we gaurantee that we'll ship a new major version every 18 months, that
>> gives people a predictable lifetime. If we carry on inventing reasons
>> for major versions at arbitrary points in time, it makes it difficult
>> to have any reasonable forward planning. It is more users friendly if
>> we can set a clear fixed timeframe for machine type lifecycle / eol
>
> IMHO we should have a new major release after we've reached a .9 minor
> release, but so far it seems like I'm the only one with that wish...
I actually like that, but then you've pretty much guaranteed that you
_cannot_ remove anything deprecated until 4.0. You and Daniel aren't
disagreeing as heavily as it seems, I think.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-10 16:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-10 6:48 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/i386: Deprecate the machines pc-0.10 to pc-0.15 Thomas Huth
2017-05-10 9:08 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-05-10 10:05 ` Thomas Huth
2017-05-10 10:31 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-05-10 14:47 ` Thomas Huth
2017-05-10 16:15 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2017-05-11 7:06 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-05-11 7:21 ` Thomas Huth
2017-05-11 9:30 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-05-11 15:10 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-05-12 6:55 ` Thomas Huth
2017-05-10 15:37 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-05-10 15:40 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-05-10 19:04 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-05-11 7:20 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-05-10 14:51 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-05-10 15:04 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-05-10 15:14 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-05-11 7:26 ` Markus Armbruster
2017-05-10 15:05 ` Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=157a6609-d75a-5d40-e5b9-c70802e40950@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).