All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Cc: QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
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: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 17:00:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170309160007.GC4910@noname.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3d1c16a1-ec05-0367-e569-64a63b34f2e3@redhat.com>

Am 08.03.2017 um 09:26 hat Thomas Huth geschrieben:
> 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.

We never really defined what major version numbers meant (except
"Anthony felt like using a new one"), so it's kind of arbitrary and we
could decide either way.

I don't think double digit minor version numbers make the switch
necessary, though. We went up to 0.15 before without any problems.

When this was discussed in IRC a while ago, the consensus seemed to be
2.10, so that's what I've been talking about since then - and from what
I read, it seems most other people are still expecting the same.

> 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?

If we want to go this way, maybe this would actually be an argument for
doing a 2.10 first to give people enough time to think about any
incompatible changes they would like to make and then do 3.0 one release
later.

Kevin

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-03-09 16:00 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 [this message]
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
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=20170309160007.GC4910@noname.redhat.com \
    --to=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
    --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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.