From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57257) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fE8Y5-0003r0-Np for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 May 2018 03:21:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fE8Y4-0006aF-TJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 May 2018 03:21:05 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:44794 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 1fE8Y4-0006Zq-Na for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 May 2018 03:21:04 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 08:21:00 +0100 From: Stefan Hajnoczi Message-ID: <20180503072100.GA5301@stefanha-x1.localdomain> References: <20180430103312.GH3249@redhat.com> <20180430132107.0a37704d.cohuck@redhat.com> <20180502074403.yh5weukbjgqsvp7n@sirius.home.kraxel.org> <20180502080200.GG3308@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0F1p//8PRICkK4MW" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180502080200.GG3308@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] release retrospective, next release timing, numbering List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Daniel =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=2E_Berrang=E9?= Cc: Gerd Hoffmann , Thomas Huth , Cornelia Huck , Peter Maydell , QEMU Developers --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 09:02:00AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrang=E9 wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 09:44:03AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > Hi, > >=20 > > > > If we bump the major version each year anyway, why not go the whole= way > > > > and use 2018.1, 2018.2, ... (or even .)? The nice thing > > > > about that is that you can see at a glance when the release took pl= ace. > > >=20 > > > ... or simply drop the first two digits and call them 18.1, 18.2, ...? >=20 > > We could also drop the major/minor scheme altogether (as they are > > meaningless anyway) and just go for YYMM, i.e. 1808 (for a august > > release). >=20 > I don't much like that - it'll lead to a wierd progression of numbers > where we'll be constantly the rationale re-explaining to people who > want to know why we've jumped from 1808 to 1902 to 1905 etc I don't see an issue with time-based numbering schemes. Ubuntu made it popular and other projects (like DPDK) are doing the same thing now. The convention is YY.MM though, not YYMM. Stefan --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJa6rhcAAoJEJykq7OBq3PIgpYH/RRTvMrNf1wTdOZRUiB5UYMn SEUDvcg2uP5zIHPYapTj87fNrzI254WPxeqcgamoSNW948+hsVsJlGqfaU1O+K1S QkMjjat8NENi2LfyZ1sIN3txjc6kCW1b8aI3oAg6I/cC199jhxGUUtNs5dzg5YEK m1SfkWXNEfTwml47Inc9d5qVQZN4flyk6RR6bp0WixXpXvE5KMBuH18CtUG797Dm VNMsv75Yt7M+bZUNsFnPknniQ6PVFW9L+NzcMO/qXkoMXHQeoVve2z0Mf6jpcp2J gqOWos3mHoTJOjtQPDb1WX04k+9aNl2mYvYN2vcFgBgFT0ruB2DhZl0ZME/g4ZE= =pHbZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW--