qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
To: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] What's the next QEMU version after 2.9 ? (or: when is a good point in time to get rid of old interfaces)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:46:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c3dfe2ea-d716-04d2-41ed-4a334559fc76@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fddf5055-c458-3893-9a18-5b0701e5431a@redhat.com>

On 27.03.2017 21:04, John Snow wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/27/2017 04:06 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 24.03.2017 23:10, John Snow wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/08/2017 03:26 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  Hi everybody,
>>>>
>>>> what will be the next version of QEMU after 2.9? Will we go for a 2.10
>>>> (as I've seen it mentioned a couple of times on the mailing list
>>>> already), or do we dare to switch to 3.0 instead?
>>>>
>>>> I personally dislike two-digit minor version numbers like 2.10 since the
>>>> non-experienced users sometimes mix it up with 2.1 ... and there have
>>>> been a couple of new cool features in the past releases that would
>>>> justify a 3.0 now, too, I think.
>>>>
>>>> But anyway, the more important thing that keeps me concerned is: Someone
>>>>  once told me that we should get rid of old parameters and interfaces
>>>> (like HMP commands) primarily only when we're changing to a new major
>>>> version number. As you all know, QEMU has a lot of legacy options, which
>>>> are likely rather confusing than helpful for the new users nowadays,
>>>> e.g. things like the "-net channel" option (which is fortunately even
>>>> hardly documented), but maybe also even the whole vlan/hub concept in
>>>> the net code, or legacy parameters like "-usbdevice". If we switch to
>>>> version 3.0, could we agree to remove at least some of them?
>>>>
>>>>  Thomas
>>>>
>>>
>>> As others have stated, we need a few releases to deprecate things first.
>>>
>>> Maybe we should develop a serious plan to develop some of our legacy
>>> interfaces first.
>>>
>>> Maybe 2.10 can introduce a list of things we want to deprecate,
>>> 2.11 can be the transition release,
>>> and then 3.0 can cut the cord and free of us our terrible burden?
>>>
>>> I have a list of things I want to axe...
>>
>> I've started a Wiki page with such a list here:
>>
>> http://wiki.qemu-project.org/Features/LegacyRemoval
>>
>> Feel free to amend!
>>
> 
> Absolutely!
> 
> Should we make an effort to print warnings for any of these items in the
> list for 2.10 that they may disappear for 3.0?

Yes, I think there was something like a consensus earlier in this thread
that we should warn for at least two releases before removing a legacy
interface, so we should make sure that we add a warning for the listed
items in 2.10.

> It'd be nice to turn this wiki list into something that we're actually
> definitely going to do.

I definitely plan to add some warnings once the hard freeze is over and
the development tree opens again. If you want to help with the patches,
you're very welcome!

 Thomas

  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-27 19:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-08  8:26 [Qemu-devel] What's the next QEMU version after 2.9 ? (or: when is a good point in time to get rid of old interfaces) Thomas Huth
2017-03-08 10:03 ` Peter Maydell
2017-03-08 11:22   ` Thomas Huth
2017-03-08 11:24     ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-03-09 12:33       ` Markus Armbruster
2017-03-09  2:21     ` Jason Wang
2017-03-09  8:50       ` Thomas Huth
2017-03-09  9:53         ` Jason Wang
2017-03-09 10:20           ` Yongbok Kim
2017-03-10 11:07             ` Jason Wang
2017-03-10 11:22               ` Peter Maydell
2017-03-10 11:53                 ` Thomas Huth
2017-03-10 11:58                   ` Yongbok Kim
2018-04-24 19:45                     ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2017-03-09 10:11         ` [Qemu-devel] external snapshots freezes block device since qemu 2.8 Piotr Rybicki
2017-03-09 12:26           ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-04-05 22:18             ` John Snow
2017-04-06  9:25               ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-03-10 14:49           ` Kashyap Chamarthy
2017-03-10 15:44             ` Piotr Rybicki
2017-03-08 10:20 ` [Qemu-devel] What's the next QEMU version after 2.9 ? (or: when is a good point in time to get rid of old interfaces) Daniel P. Berrange
2017-03-08 11:19   ` Gerd Hoffmann
2017-04-12 13:47     ` Marc-André Lureau
2017-04-12 14:10       ` Gerd Hoffmann
2017-03-09 16:00 ` Kevin Wolf
2017-03-24 22:10 ` John Snow
2017-03-27  8:06   ` Thomas Huth
2017-03-27 12:01     ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-03-27 12:49       ` Peter Maydell
2017-04-03 14:19         ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-04-11 12:53           ` Markus Armbruster
2017-04-18  9:51             ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-04-18 11:57               ` Gerd Hoffmann
2017-04-18 17:18                 ` John Snow
2017-04-19  5:53                   ` Markus Armbruster
2017-04-19 10:35                     ` Gerd Hoffmann
2017-04-19 10:15                   ` Gerd Hoffmann
2017-04-19 23:08                     ` John Snow
2017-04-20  5:40                       ` Gerd Hoffmann
2017-04-20 11:10                         ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2017-03-27 12:56       ` [Qemu-devel] Deprecating the -net option (was: What's the next QEMU version after 2.9 ? (or: when is a good point in time to get rid of old interfaces)) Thomas Huth
2017-03-27 13:09         ` [Qemu-devel] Deprecating the -net option Thomas Huth
2017-03-27 15:04           ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-03-27 19:04     ` [Qemu-devel] What's the next QEMU version after 2.9 ? (or: when is a good point in time to get rid of old interfaces) John Snow
2017-03-27 19:46       ` Thomas Huth [this message]
2017-03-29 16:21       ` [Qemu-devel] Deprecating old machine types Thomas Huth
2017-03-29 16:46         ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-03-29 16:54           ` Thomas Huth
2017-03-29 16:58           ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-03-29 21:42             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-03-30  8:04             ` Gerd Hoffmann
2017-03-28 17:18     ` [Qemu-devel] Deprecating the -drive option is a good point in time to get rid of old interfaces) Kevin Wolf

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=c3dfe2ea-d716-04d2-41ed-4a334559fc76@redhat.com \
    --to=thuth@redhat.com \
    --cc=jsnow@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /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).