From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41200) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clvBF-00036b-8L for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 05:20:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clvBC-0000Be-3p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 05:20:21 -0500 Received: from mailapp01.imgtec.com ([195.59.15.196]:25130) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clvBB-0000AR-Sx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 05:20:18 -0500 References: <3d1c16a1-ec05-0367-e569-64a63b34f2e3@redhat.com> <940ff281-82cd-18cf-160e-c5234f65db18@redhat.com> <9d6c61bc-4a95-ce72-3565-e498f9c2b351@redhat.com> <16223ebe-e08d-c686-7ff3-a58db88e3a01@redhat.com> From: Yongbok Kim Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 10:20:09 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <16223ebe-e08d-c686-7ff3-a58db88e3a01@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: Jason Wang , Thomas Huth , Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers , Stefan Hajnoczi , Gerd Hoffmann , Aurelien Jarno On 09/03/2017 09:53, Jason Wang wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 2017=E5=B9=B403=E6=9C=8809=E6=97=A5 16:50, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 09.03.2017 03:21, Jason Wang wrote: >>> >>> On 2017=E5=B9=B403=E6=9C=8808=E6=97=A5 19:22, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>> On 08.03.2017 11:03, Peter Maydell wrote: >>>>> On 8 March 2017 at 09:26, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>>>> But anyway, the more important thing that keeps me concerned is: >>>>>> Someone >>>>>> once told me that we should get rid of old parameters and inter= faces >>>>>> (like HMP commands) primarily only when we're changing to a new ma= jor >>>>>> version number. As you all know, QEMU has a lot of legacy options, >>>>>> which >>>>>> are likely rather confusing than helpful for the new users nowaday= s, >>>>>> e.g. things like the "-net channel" option (which is fortunately e= ven >>>>>> 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? >>>>> I think if we are going to deprecate and remove options we need >>>>> a clear transition plan for doing so, which means at least one >>>>> release where options are "still works, but warn that they >>>>> are going away with pointer to documentation or similar info >>>>> about their replacement syntax", before actually dropping them. >>>> Yes, that's certainly a good idea. But as Daniel suggested in his ma= il, >>>> I think we should also have the rule that the option should be marke= d as >>>> deprecated in multiple releases first - so that the users have a cha= nce >>>> to speak up before something gets really removed (otherwise the opti= on >>>> could be removed right on the first day after the initial release wi= th >>>> the deprecation message, so there is no time for the user to notice = this >>>> and complain). Not sure whether we need three releases, as Daniel >>>> suggested, though, but if that's common sense, that's fine for me, t= oo. >>>> >>>> Anyway, I've now started a Wiki page where we could track the remova= l of >>>> deprecated interfaces: >>>> >>>> http://wiki.qemu-project.org/Features/LegacyRemoval >>>> >>>> Feedback / updates / addition of other legacy interfaces is welcome! >>>> >>>> Thomas >>>> >>> I think we may want to add mipsnet to the list too. It's kernel drive= r >>> was removed about 3 years ago. >> But that's still the default network of the "mipssim" machine ... >> is that machine considered as deprecated, too? >> >> Thomas >=20 > I think so, according to [1], it was deprecated. >=20 > [1] https://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/MIPSsim >=20 > Thanks Indeed but we still use the platform to verify architectural compatibilities even for newer MIPS architectures. Regards, Yongbok