From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51537) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cm0UE-0000Cj-Tn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 11:00:23 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cm0U7-000093-3l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 11:00:19 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55406) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cm0U6-00008V-UQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 11:00:11 -0500 Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 17:00:07 +0100 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20170309160007.GC4910@noname.redhat.com> References: <3d1c16a1-ec05-0367-e569-64a63b34f2e3@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3d1c16a1-ec05-0367-e569-64a63b34f2e3@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) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Thomas Huth Cc: QEMU Developers , Peter Maydell , Stefan Hajnoczi 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