From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55391) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clWvB-00061e-JJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 03:26:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clWv7-0006IO-I7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 03:26:09 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48424) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1clWv7-0006IG-Bs for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 03:26:05 -0500 From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: <3d1c16a1-ec05-0367-e569-64a63b34f2e3@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 09:26:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [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: QEMU Developers Cc: Peter Maydell , Stefan Hajnoczi 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