From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51964) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fEADG-0003MU-JQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 May 2018 05:07:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fEADB-0000JY-Cx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 May 2018 05:07:42 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:35514 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 1fEADB-0000JK-9K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 May 2018 05:07:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 10:07:27 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Message-ID: <20180503090727.GC11382@redhat.com> Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= References: <20180430103312.GH3249@redhat.com> <20180430132107.0a37704d.cohuck@redhat.com> <20180502074403.yh5weukbjgqsvp7n@sirius.home.kraxel.org> <20180502080200.GG3308@redhat.com> <20180503072100.GA5301@stefanha-x1.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180503072100.GA5301@stefanha-x1.localdomain> 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: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: Gerd Hoffmann , Thomas Huth , Cornelia Huck , Peter Maydell , QEMU Developers On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 08:21:00AM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 09:02:00AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 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 w= hole 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 too= k place. > > > >=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 >=20 > 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. >=20 > The convention is YY.MM though, not YYMM. It feels like we've got quite a strong backing for time based versioning amongst people replying here. I'd be happy with YY.MM Regards, Daniel --=20 |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberran= ge :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.c= om :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberran= ge :|