From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47919)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <cohuck@redhat.com>) id 1fDmGd-0005dh-LD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2018 03:33:36 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <cohuck@redhat.com>) id 1fDmGc-0001dK-Lz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2018 03:33:35 -0400
Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:55450 helo=mx1.redhat.com)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <cohuck@redhat.com>) id 1fDmGc-0001cn-Ho
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2018 03:33:34 -0400
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 09:33:26 +0200
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20180502093326.2fbec55f.cohuck@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <ac216b06-9469-addd-b5a1-3a3a89fd0782@redhat.com>
References: <CAFEAcA-hha7jMSfPTdNEVKhuJr4nwAx4wKmEk5E9+j-JS4U14w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20180430103312.GH3249@redhat.com>
	<20180430132107.0a37704d.cohuck@redhat.com>
	<ac216b06-9469-addd-b5a1-3a3a89fd0782@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] release retrospective, next release timing,
 numbering
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Cc: "Daniel P. =?UTF-8?B?QmVycmFuZ8Op?=" <berrange@redhat.com>, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 19:36:40 +0200
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 30.04.2018 13:21, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:33:12 +0100
> > Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 <berrange@redhat.com> wrote: =20
> [...]
> >> Given, that we have a clear deprecation process now, my view is that
> >> we should formally declare that major version numbers changes are
> >> meaningless. As soon as you try to assign special meaning to major
> >> version changes, you open the door to endless debate about whether
> >> a particular set of changes is meaningful enough to justify the
> >> major version change, leading to eventually 2.42.  =20
> >=20
> > I agree. =20
>=20
> I agree with this, too. We've seen that in some v3.0 discussions during
> the last year.
>=20
> >> Two possible options
> >>
> >>  a) Bump major version once a year, so we'll have 3.0, 3.1, 3.3,
> >>     4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 5.0, ...etc  We missed the first release this
> >>     year, so we would only have 3.0 and 3.1 this year.
> >>
> >>  b) Bump major release when minor version gets double-digits.
> >>     eg 3.0, 3.1, ...., 3.9, 3.9, 4.0, ...., 4.9, 5.0... =20
>=20
> It's just a matter of taste, but I think I'd prefer variant b). That
> will bump the major release approx. every three years which sounds like
> a good time frame for me.

I think anything that keeps release numbers in ascending order would
basically work :)

>=20
> > If we bump the major version each year anyway, why not go the whole way
> > and use 2018.1, 2018.2, ... (or even <year>.<month>)? The nice thing
> > about that is that you can see at a glance when the release took place.=
 =20
>=20
> ... or simply drop the first two digits and call them 18.1, 18.2, ...?

Uh, and what happens in the next century?

:)

So many options, and all make some sense... I predict we stay with the
same numbering as before :)