From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:40063) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ghI2C-0001Uj-BX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2019 12:52:57 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ghI2B-0001G5-Gy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2019 12:52:56 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57076) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ghI2B-0001Dw-88 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2019 12:52:55 -0500 References: <20180906111107.30684-1-danielhb413@gmail.com> <47023eb5-41f1-1b60-1094-d607999e93b6@redhat.com> <200ecea3-1ef4-3ecf-6b37-f6e45fef3849@redhat.com> <20190109172023.GK4867@localhost.localdomain> From: Eric Blake Message-ID: Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 11:52:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="QNv66DgGkblyXh3wPTOabQps1zE6137ao" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] HMP/snapshot changes - do not use ID anymore List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Max Reitz , Kevin Wolf Cc: armbru@redhat.com, Daniel Henrique Barboza , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, muriloo@linux.ibm.com, dgilbert@redhat.com This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --QNv66DgGkblyXh3wPTOabQps1zE6137ao From: Eric Blake To: Max Reitz , Kevin Wolf Cc: armbru@redhat.com, Daniel Henrique Barboza , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, muriloo@linux.ibm.com, dgilbert@redhat.com Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] HMP/snapshot changes - do not use ID anymore References: <20180906111107.30684-1-danielhb413@gmail.com> <47023eb5-41f1-1b60-1094-d607999e93b6@redhat.com> <200ecea3-1ef4-3ecf-6b37-f6e45fef3849@redhat.com> <20190109172023.GK4867@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 1/9/19 11:38 AM, Max Reitz wrote: >=20 > > Actually, to me what you're saying sounds more like "Our deprecation > policy is useless" to which I wholeheartedly agree. I think we should > only remove things in major releases, and only if it was deprecated in > the previous major release already. (So if you deprecate something in > 4.0, you can remove it in 5.0; but if you deprecate it in 4.1, you can > remove it only in 6.0.) From a user standpoint I really think we > deprecate stuff too irregularly. > That's actually incorrect. Our current version numbering scheme is that the major version number is NOT synonymous with major releases: we just bump the major version number once per year, and ALL releases are on equal footing with no one release being more major than others. Thus, a policy that (at least) 2 releases is needed for a deprecation is consistent, where one that requires waiting for a bump in the major version number (which is as short as one release and as long as 3, given that we bump every year with about 3 releases per year) is the one that is less predictable and less meaningful (why is waiting for January better than waiting for 2 releases?). --=20 Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3226 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org --QNv66DgGkblyXh3wPTOabQps1zE6137ao Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEY3OaSlgimHGqKqRv3g5py3orov0FAlw2NPQACgkQ3g5py3or ov3TRggAgTo1KYBk/PHbtQeNwswmO28LDmgJPJmPthzPZWbS9zrPOYwX2WoGzNFp 5SGJsmjx9ZgrxWgRX0YyDIfNCdWbM7B5+FhX/yejTwuDX2Iqxr5Ppdhi+rdUlrkx uoVEAx7HxXM8rHCoIdUej/KDPlTrW1eYbbcqAKsOIDCvIfzEhtxJxwmbRm+gc8kK MCIQE3mQYlsKl48mQ8cdUPmfAmB99kYQy7pjGX3FeRlsxVkpzzPNr+kHgnyqiUsD UGHfqxRxHgJeUEjijWWUyy/7r1Fm1lVL7E4Nf1uSZ5kwYd+qR8sWP4ZrNn5vyk+E Aaft1hiz72ei2myNkea8u5tT72Jgpg== =QEoI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --QNv66DgGkblyXh3wPTOabQps1zE6137ao--