From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: Versioning scheme for rdma-plumbing Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 10:02:23 -0600 Message-ID: <20160915160223.GB18154@obsidianresearch.com> References: <20160914044745.GB7975@obsidianresearch.com> <20160914122820.GA32048@infradead.org> <20160914173327.GJ16014@obsidianresearch.com> <20160915061509.GB4869@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160915061509.GB4869-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Christoph Hellwig 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, Knut Omang List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 11:15:09PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 11:33:27AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > - 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. > > > > Can you explain this some more? > > > > If we use a single integer ala udev, I'd see minor updates, LTS > > branch, etc being released with a suffix eg: 123.2 > > Well, that's not a monotonically increasing version number anymore. > And at least in the past systemd folks argued against even doing these > releases. If you're fine with doing minor releases off these single > component versions this argument goes away of course. Yah, I wouldn't as strict as what you are describing. The 'single integer' is really semantic versioning with the 'MAJOR' stripped off, since a project goal is to not make incompatable changes. Most upstream releases should be of the 'add functionality in a backwards-compatible manner' and should just increment the integer. Upstream can always increment the integer If upstream botches a release then it might make a quick 123.1, but generally upstream would not be in the buisness of backporting fixes from N to N-1. *However* I think we should make room for the people to collaborate on a LTS branch that would use the .X nomenclature. Much like in the kernel Linus doesn't maintain the -stable, but makes space for the people who do. eg perhaps the OFED team would be willing to direct their energies upstream and maintain a public stable branch for the duration of their release cylce ? Jason -- 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