From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: Versioning scheme for rdma-plumbing Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 05:28:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20160914122820.GA32048@infradead.org> References: <20160914044745.GB7975@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160914044745.GB7975-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Leon Romanovsky , Doug Ledford , Devesh Sharma , Hal Rosenstock , Mike Marciniszyn , Moni Shoua , Sean Hefty , Steve Wise , Tatyana Nikolova , Vladimir Sokolovsky , Yishai Hadas , linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Christoph Hellwig List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Hi Jason, thanks for the writeup. Versioning is always a bit of a bikeshedding exercise, but I'd still vote for following the kernel versioning (while fully agreeing with your thiughts on shared library versioning). Two reasons for that: - it's a good marker of what version of the userspace code you need to take advtantage of new kernel features - it allows for much smoother minor updates. I hope this will be rare, but my experience from various projects tells me that they will occasionally be needed. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html