Re: [virtio-dev] RFC: future virtio spec numbering

[Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>]

On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 22:14:35 +0300
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:

> What should we call the next version of the virtio spec?
> 
> The issue is that unfortunately current
> spec versions all have "latest" link to
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.0/virtio-v1.0.html
> 
> Also, Google search for virtio still tends to turn up csprd01
> and that has the above link in it.
> 
> I asked about adding links to
>        http://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/latest/final/virtio-latest.html
>        http://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/latest/final/virtio-latest.pdf
> 
> but did not get a response so apparently no go.
> 
> Options:
> 
> 1. virtio 1.0 cs05.
>     Pros: latest link will point to the correct version.
>     Cons: seems to be confusing to people - 1.0 is a product so one
>     would expect 1.0 be in bugfixes-only mode at this point.
>     And what would we call a bugfix branch if we ever made one?
> 
> 2. virtio 1.1
>     Pros: internet searches will start finding the new version (although
>     there's a risk it will get struct at csprd01 again).
>     Cons: latest links from 1.0 will not point at this one.
> 
> 3. virtio 2.0
>     Pros: publicity. people will know it's a new spec.
>     Also, this leaves an option to do a bugfix release and call it 1.1.
>     Cons: people might get confused thinking it's not backwards compatible.
> 
> Let's discuss here a bit, then do a ballot.

Ah, I voted first :)

Let me copy/paste my comment here:

I'd prefer 1.1 for the following reasons:

- It is an incremental improvement over 1.0 (new device types, small
enhancements)
- There are no changes queued for which we would need to introduce a
backward compat mode
- We need to distinguish from 1.0, which is in bugfix only mode