From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48061) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fDoJe-0002r6-FG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2018 05:44:51 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fDoJZ-000730-HI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2018 05:44:50 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:46696 helo=mx1.redhat.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fDoJZ-00072l-CJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2018 05:44:45 -0400 Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 11:44:34 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20180502114434.2ad9cc16.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20180502081632.GH3308@redhat.com> References: <87d0ye8qho.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <20180502081632.GH3308@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] release retrospective, next release timing, numbering List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Daniel P. =?UTF-8?B?QmVycmFuZ8Op?=" Cc: Markus Armbruster , Peter Maydell , Thomas Huth , QEMU Developers , Stefan Hajnoczi On Wed, 2 May 2018 09:16:32 +0100 Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 09:29:39AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > > How can I provide both the old command line in all its quirky glory and > > a QAPIfied command line? Unless we can, the deprecation policy doesn't > > help one bit, it still wants us to replicate every mess we ever made in > > the old command line. Would that be a smart choice? =20 >=20 > I venture to suggest that the deprecation policy leaves us enough > ambiguity that we could issue a deprecation warning saying something > suitably vague like "various quirks of the cli may change in incompatible > ways in future", and then just do a big-bang conversion to QAPI'ified > version. If there are known quirks that we intend to break we could > call them out, but if we accidentally change a few quirks without > realizing it, so be it. >=20 > IOW, the big-bang conversion to QAPIified CLI is possible with our > deprecation policy, without having the maintain the existing code > in parallel with bug-for-bug compat. The main constraint is that > we would need to have a reasonable idea about when the QAPIified > CLI is likely to be ready to merge, so we have ability to warn > developers of forthcoming changes. I agree, that should be workable with our current deprecation policy. [If it is at all feasible, we should also warn explicitly if a known-quirky option is used, but the general warning should be enough, especially if we feature it prominently in QEMU release notes as well.]