[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] RFC: Version support policy

  • To: Ian Jackson <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 14:00:45 +0200
  • Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
  • Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=S6E06ProHw9qSsgdiUpk7LEn3Mv9nFwIHSI2203KSsU=; b=JWEOWdpMExLsgI4Tr55joQdjhOgDNHnpvJK906+AbeKfnyXMZXXfK1H99y7x3u7stYPr1NvPKGIYxxLBqD2+K4AJTSyvWpiirOu5bzO70hHlBojDu4pUfJvQa8TF1JKLhswUtvt1MvITSgShL6dcozRahab6ZUNWsE1as7tNxCCq+QN7Zua2D8N8LTaju6RlQIVxD+qpCwOgQHh4nPTjLsqcJ3doxA9YDm/K28tvZDEIX1l2YFHG0jV+OMAG5vJIO2OLYE63rwRTU0baagGNnwGiJGz0T98scpHwdAIz37sRn1IV95t4v6Fi99/UuktNmLQoJkZ6jljIC0Z518ORlQ==
  • Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=g91OBcpZFItG3VXpu/CEXDBDx3kDBTRav8/5xvoKkngAjbY1jj02ji8gbEfdULPTFZ+HtPRsN5AMMHLARhQo/p9+UCwPGwciPRLR7YCg7FIcpdBaLacARP9F9eFxNKjxlF/zWPJYQIGiAuupvkiQiX7akJCVlvwK3r5wvBiC2A2+Bf4ZqWiaEziMXKOKqYsAhe4O443OzvqN1SK+RSNRsx6nff3Lsd0h7Nu4803YmTbiFsIPYCOjciafGi0JbraXbeeeEF/4+KtILyO79Oi79wzbD2yQ6sGVT/cHLEIfhmSxrSwVB5oBejK7Pig+fAA/gZLgVT9kN1UiNFyJh501eQ==
  • Authentication-results: xen.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;xen.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
  • Cc: committers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 12:00:59 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On 19.08.2021 13:55, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH] RFC: Version support policy"):
>> On 13.08.2021 13:37, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> In this patch I propose a cutoff of 6 years.
>>> Obviously there will be debate about the precise value.
>> Indeed I consider this way too short. Purely as a personal (and
>> abstract) view (realizing this isn't really practical, and knowing
>> there are reasons why I'd actually like to see a bump of the
>> baseline) I'd prefer if there weren't minimum version requirements
>> at all (apart from maybe - along the lines of ...
>>> It will also be necessary to make exceptions, and/or to make different
>>> rules for different architectures.  In particular, new architectures,
>>> new configurations, or new features, may need an absolute earliest
>>> tooling date which is considerably less than the usual limit.
>> ... this - a baseline determined when Xen became an open source
>> project).
> I don't think that is workable.  Effectively, it means we are
> targeting a constantly-obsolescing dependency environment.  It
> would prevent us from adopting even very-well-established facilities
> and improvements in our dependencies.
> Effectively, it would force us to continue to write using 10- or
> 20-year-old idioms.  Idioms many of which have been found to be
> suboptimal, and which in some cases are becoming unsupported.

Right - that's why I did write "knowing there are reasons why I'd
actually like to see a bump of the baseline". I'm really of two
minds here, and either route has perhaps severe drawbacks.




Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.