[openstack-dev] [Nova] Release versioning proposal for Liberty

John Garbutt john at johngarbutt.com
Wed Jun 3 13:01:06 UTC 2015


(To be clear, this is a proposal to be discussed and not a decision.)

The version number can help us communicate that:
* you can consume a milestone release
** ... but the docs and translations may not be totally up to date
* you can consume any commit
** ... but there is no formal tracking of bugs and features in that commit
** ... but can still live upgrade from the previous release to any
commit in the current release
* if you need completed docs and translations, wait for the final
liberty release
* we only support upgrade between <N>.x and <N+1>.x
** to ensure we can do live upgrades, but with minimal technical debt over time
** http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/devref/project_scope.html#upgrade-expectations

The idea is to keep what we do today, but try and communicate what
that is a little better. Making it clear you can consume the milestone
releases, and indeed the master branch, if thats what you want to,
while being clear about what you loose and/or gain over waiting for
the final release and/or stable branch.

Given we are thinking Liberty is moving to semantic versioning, maybe
it could look like this:
* 12.0.1 (liberty-1) will have some features (hopefully), and will be a tag
* 12.0.2.dev1 is the first commit after 12.0.1 and does not get a tag
* 12.0.2.dev1234 would be the 1234th commit after 12.0.1
* 12.0.2 (liberty-2) will also contain features
* 12.0.3 (liberty-3) is focused on priority features (given the current plan)
* 12.1 is Liberty release is just bug fixes on 12.0.3
* 13.0.0.dev1 would be the first commit to open M


This is part of my general push to make sure we are better at
communicating what we are up to, and more importantly, WHY are we
doing what we are doing.

I see lots of frustration in new (and existing) contributors, where
you get stuck between three layers of process, and left very
frustrated and confused. I see Liberty as being a time where we can
get more explicit at explaining whats going on and why, so we can have
a well informed debate on how to move forward. Making it clear why we
are doing what we are doing, feels to me like the logical first step.

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list