qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Peter Maydell" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	devel@lists.libvirt.org, "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>,
	"Laurent Vivier" <laurent@vivier.eu>,
	qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org,
	"Peter Xu" <peterx@redhat.com>, "Fabiano Rosas" <farosas@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs/about: Automatically deprecate versioned machine types older than 6 years
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:54:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZjEiPTfzeELC3qIX@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <05cab8d3-bda0-4452-92d7-061f4719eba7@redhat.com>

On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 12:29:14PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 30/04/2024 11.55, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 08:45:29AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > > Old machine types often have bugs or work-arounds that affect our
> > > possibilities to move forward with the QEMU code base (see for example
> > > https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/2213 for a bug that likely
> > > cannot be fixed without breaking live migration with old machine types,
> > > or https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-12/msg04516.html or
> > > commit ea985d235b86). So instead of going through the process of manually
> > > deprecating old machine types again and again, let's rather add an entry
> > > that can stay, which declares that machine types older than 6 years are
> > > considered as deprecated automatically. Six years should be sufficient to
> > > support the release cycles of most Linux distributions.
> > 
> > Reading this again, I think we're mixing two concepts here.
> > 
> > With this 6 year cut off, we're declaring the actual *removal* date,
> > not the deprecation date.
> > 
> > A deprecation is something that happens prior to removal normally,
> > to give people a warning of /future/ removal, as a suggestion
> > that they stop using it.
> > 
> > If we never set the 'deprecation_reason' on a machine type, then
> > unless someone reads this doc, they'll never realize they are on
> > a deprecated machine.
> > 
> > When it comes to machine types, I see deprecation as a way to tell
> > people they should not deploy a /new/ VM on a machine type, only
> > use it for back compat (incoming migration / restore from saved
> > image) with existing deployed VMs.
> > 
> > If we delete a machine on the 6 year anniversary, then users
> > don't want to be deploying /new/ VMs using that on the
> > 5 year anniversary as it only gives a 1 year upgrade window.
> > 
> > So how long far back do we consider it reasonable for a user
> > to deploy a /new/ VM on an old machine type ? 1 year, 2 years,
> > 3 years ?
> > 
> > 
> > How about picking the half way point ?  3 years ?
> > 
> > ie, set deprecation_reason for any machine that is 3 years
> > old, but declare that our deprecation cycle lasts for
> > 3 years, instead of the normal 1 year, when applied to
> > machine types.
> > 
> > This would give a strong hint that users should get off the
> > old machine type, several years before its finally deleted.
> 
> Sounds like a good idea, too! Since I have to drop this patch here anyway,
> could you maybe write such a new patch? (or do you want me to try to
> formulate this?)

Yes, I'll send something for discussion soon.

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|



      reply	other threads:[~2024-04-30 16:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-30  6:45 [PATCH] docs/about: Automatically deprecate versioned machine types older than 6 years Thomas Huth
2024-04-30  9:32 ` Peter Maydell
2024-04-30  9:40 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2024-04-30  9:58   ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2024-04-30 10:02   ` Thomas Huth
2024-04-30  9:45 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2024-04-30  9:58   ` Cédric Le Goater
2024-04-30  9:55 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2024-04-30 10:21   ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2024-04-30 10:29   ` Thomas Huth
2024-04-30 16:54     ` Daniel P. Berrangé [this message]

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=ZjEiPTfzeELC3qIX@redhat.com \
    --to=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
    --cc=devel@lists.libvirt.org \
    --cc=farosas@suse.de \
    --cc=laurent@vivier.eu \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-arm@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
    --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).