On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 1:43 PM Lucas C. Villa Real <lu...@osdyne.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 10:30 PM Alistair Francis <alistai...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> > + >> > + object_class_property_add_str(oc, "density", stm32f100_get_density, >> > + stm32f100_set_density); >> > + object_class_property_set_description(oc, "density", >> > + "Set the STM32F100 density line device. " >> > + "Valid values are 'low', 'medium', and 'high' (default)."); >> > } >> >> This should be split into a separate commit from adding the machine > > > Ok, I'll do that. > >> >> Isn't this exactly the same as the stm32vldiscovery board? Which is >> already very similar to the netduino2 machine. I'm not sure we need >> another machine. >> >> It could make more sense to deprecate the stm32vldiscovery machine and >> replace it with this generic one. At least we could keep everything in >> the one file and reuse a lot of the code. > > > What is the protocol for deprecating a machine? Should I just submit a patch > that removes it along with the corresponding entry in the MAINTAINERS file? > Should I coordinate that offline with the maintainer of the machine that's to > be retired?
There is an official deprecation policy: https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/about/deprecated.html#deprecated-features The board will be listed as deprecated for two releases and then removed. Alistair > > Thanks, > Lucas