Open Stack

On Tuesday, March 5, 2013, Mark McLoughlin wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 10:29 -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com<javascript:;>>
> 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
>
> Thanks
>
> >           - 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?
>
> If/when we ever remove deprecated APIs.


OK


>
> >         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?
>
> A weak, silly 2013.1.0-2012 approach :)


Heh, got it.

Doug


>
> Cheers,
> Mark.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130306/5ef101ee/attachment.html>