Open Stack

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hey,
>
> The thread on naming of namespace packages[1] and the discussion about
> PEP426 on distutils-sig[2] have lead me to these conclusion:
>
>   - Naming the package oslo.config is a better choice than oslo-config.
>     I don't think there's necessarily a standard for naming these
>     things but it seems more likely that period-separated will become
>     more common than hyphen-separated (i.e. zope.interface vs
>     oslo-config)


>   - The date based 2013.1 version is likely to be disallowed by PEP426
>     when it is ratified and we'll end up making the date based version
>     a "private version" but 0.2013.1 would be the version on PyPI. Uggh.


>   - I'm coming around to the idea of using semantic versioning (i.e.
>     x.y.z) and increasing the major number when removing any deprecated
>     APIs. That certainly is the trend expressed in PEP426 and on
>     distutils-sig. I'd be far more reluctant to actually remove
>     deprecated APIs, though, so this would change our policy from
>     "remove APIs after a year of deprecation" to "very rarely making
>     any incompatible changes to our APIs"
>

+1 to semantic versioning

-0 to not cleaning up deprecated APIs


>
>   - With semantic versioning, I figure we'd increase the micro number
>     when we do release from the stable branch and increase the minor
>     number with every coordinated OpenStack release.
>

And the major number?


>
> In practical terms, I'm proposing doing:
>
>  -package = 'oslo-config'
>  -version = '2013.1'
>  +package = 'oslo.config'
>  +version = '1.1.0'
>

Why not 1.0.0?


>
> in oslo-config's setup.py
>
> I know this is painful for packagers. In Fedora, I'll have to set an
> "epoch" which packagers always hate doing. In Debian, it'll probably
> mean the package name changing to python-oslo.config.
>
> However, this is why we didn't publish directly to PyPI - we wanted the
> opportunity to catch issues like this. So, I'm thinking we should just
> go for it ASAP.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>
> [1] -
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-February/thread.html#6078
> [2] -
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2013-March/thread.html#20054
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130305/8de7c6d1/attachment.html>