Re: [PATCH 14/14] docs: document special exception for machine type deprecation & removal

[Thomas Huth]

On 01/05/2024 20.27, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> This extends the deprecation policy to indicate that versioned machine
> types will be marked deprecated after 3 years, and then subject to
> removal after a further 3 years has passed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
> ---
>   docs/about/deprecated.rst | 12 ++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/docs/about/deprecated.rst b/docs/about/deprecated.rst
> index 7b8aafa15b..55120e774c 100644
> --- a/docs/about/deprecated.rst
> +++ b/docs/about/deprecated.rst
> @@ -11,6 +11,18 @@ releases, the feature is liable to be removed. Deprecated 
> features may also
>   generate warnings on the console when QEMU starts up, or if activated via a
>   monitor command, however, this is not a mandatory requirement.
>   
> +As a special exception to this general timeframe, rather than have an
> +indefinite lifetime, versioned machine types are only intended to be
> +supported for a period of 6 years, equivalent to 18 QEMU releases. All
> +versioned machine types will be automatically marked deprecated after an
> +initial 3 years (9 QEMU releases) has passed, and will then be deleted after

Should there be the word "period" after "3 years" ? Otherwise it sounds a 
little bit weird to me - but I'm also not a native speaker, so I might be wrong.

> +a further 3 year period has passed. It is recommended that a deprecated
> +machine type is only used for incoming migrations and restore of saved state,
> +for pre-existing VM deployments.

Should we maybe add a sentence that they should ideally be updated to a 
newer machine type during a service window with downtime? (well, it might be 
also obvious, so maybe not worth to mention it)

>  Newly deployed VMs should exclusively use a
> +non-deprecated machine type, with use of the most recent version highly
> +recommended. Non-versioned machine types follow the general feature
> +deprecation policy.

Anyway:
Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>