Open Stack

Hi all,

0.MAJOR.MINOR  versioning totally makes sense to me until we get to 1.0.0.

Just a couple of examples of releases we are doing this week:
1) tripleo-image-elements is bumped from 0.0.8 to 0.1.0 (we introduced a
kind of incompatible change by switching Seed VM to neutron-dhcp-agent)
2) os-collect-config is bumped from 0.1.4 to 0.1.5 (we had Clint's patch
reducing the default polling interval, which is not a bug-fix, but doesn't
break backwards compatibility either)

Thanks,
Roman


On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Robert Collins
<robertc at robertcollins.net>wrote:

> So, Chris and Roman have been pushing the cart of 'get all
> [non-incubator] TripleO projects setup to do releases'. One
> interesting thing came up is that we have no particular discussion
> about how to choose versions.
>
> OpenStack as a whole seems to largely be semver compatible. For
> TripleO I think we should follow semver fairly closely as we're going
> to be tied into folks deployment cycle - being able to reason about
> likely incompatibilities is a Good Thing.
>
> Where we haven't committed to a 1.0.0. release though, there is a grey
> area, as semver basically says 'no semantic meaning at all there'.
> Roman and I discussed this and we think that treating 0. versions as
> 0.MAJOR.MINOR makes sense. So we would go from 0.0.X to 0.1.0 when we
> do something incompatible with the prior 0.0.X version, and just
> increment X otherwise.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Rob
>
> --
> Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
> Distinguished Technologist
> HP Converged Cloud
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131031/28c01eca/attachment.html>