On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 12:14:43PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 17/01/2025 12.07, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 11:27:35AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
While our new auto-disablement of old machine types will only kick in with the next (v10.1) release, the pc-i440fx-2.* machine types have been explicitly marked as deprecated via our old deprecation policy mechanism before (two releases ago), so it should be fine to remove them now already.
These were marked deprecated manually in 9.1.0 with:
commit 792b4fdd4eb8197bd6eb9e80a1dfaf0cb3b54aeb Author: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org> Date: Wed Feb 28 10:34:35 2024 +0100
hw/i386/pc: Deprecate 2.4 to 2.12 pc-i440fx machines Similarly to the commit c7437f0ddb "docs/about: Mark the old pc-i440fx-2.0 - 2.3 machine types as deprecated", deprecate the 2.4 to 2.12 machines.
but that commit was reverted a couple of weeks later in 9.1.0 dev
No, we did not revert that commit, the text is still there, so I think it still applies.
Oh, you mean the text in deprecated.rst. I just reverted the manual deprecation in the code.
when I added the automatic deprecation/deletion logic
commit 37193b7b43b6a973e56fa115098c5895ebdc7145 Author: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> Date: Thu Jun 20 17:57:41 2024 +0100
hw/i386: remove obsolete manual deprecation reason string of i440fx machines
IOW, in terms of releases, these deprecations were introduced under the new policy rather than the old policy.
Why should your generic policy override an explicit statement for those machines?
I guess that's matter of opinion. I considered the policy to apply to all versioned machine types deprecated from 9.1.0 onwards. Having them mentioned in deprecated.rst doesn't alter the policy, IMHO, it is merely a bit of redundant documentation. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|