Loic Dachary wrote:
>
>
> On 27/02/2015 23:47, Alex Elsayed wrote:
>> Loic Dachary wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27/02/2015 13:59, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Loic Dachary <loic@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27/02/2015 00:59, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>> From: "Loic Dachary" <loic@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> To: "Sage Weil" <sweil@xxxxxxxxxx>, ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 3:38:31 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: ceph versions
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Sage,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I prefer Option D because it's self explanatory. We could also drop
>>>>>>> the names. I became attached to them but they are confusing to the
>>>>>>> new users who is required to remember that firefly is 0.80, giant is
>>>>>>> 0.87 etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 27/02/2015 00:12, Sage Weil wrote:
>>>>>>>> -- Option D -- "labeled"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> X.Y-{dev,rc,release}Z
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Increment Y on each major named release
>>>>>>>> - Increment X if it's a major major named release (bigger change
>>>>>>>> than usual)
>>>>>>>> - Use dev, rc, or release prefix to clearly label what type of
>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>> this is
>>>>>>>> - Increment Z for stable updates
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1.0-dev1 first infernalis dev release
>>>>>>>> 1.0-dev2 another dev release
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> 1.0-rc1 first rc
>>>>>>>> 1.0-rc2 next rc
>>>>>>>> 1.0-release1 final release
>>>>>>>> 1.0-release2 stable update
>>>>>>>> 1.0-release3 stable update
>>>>>>>> 1.1-dev1 first cut for j-release
>>>>>>>> 1.1-dev2 ...
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> 1.1-rc1
>>>>>>>> 1.1-release1 stable
>>>>>>>> 1.1-release2 stable
>>>>>>>> 1.1-release3 stable
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Q: How do I tell what kind of release this is?
>>>>>>>> A: Look at the string embedded in the version
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Q: Will these funny strings confuse things that sort by version?
>>>>>>>> A: I don't think so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dev < rc < release : good pick ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the one I lean towards, with one slight variation. I'd drop
>>>>>> the 'release' tag and have X.Y[.Z] format for the formal releases,
>>>>>> e.g., 2.0-dev1 first infernalis dev release 2.0-dev2
>>>>>> ..
>>>>>> 2.0-rc1
>>>>>> 2.0-rc2
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> 2.0 # infarnalis
>>>>>> 2.0.1 # first dot release
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> 2.1-dev1 # first j dev release
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> 2.1 # j release
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then after a few release move to 3.0 to avoid the dreadful big
>>>>>> numbers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sage did mention that this might have some issues in certain
>>>>>> environments to sort correctly. Possibly replacing the dash with a
>>>>>> tilde solves this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The lexicographic order of ~ is modified in debian and that may create
>>>>> confusion:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://man.he.net/man5/deb-version
>>>>>
>>>>> lexical comparison is a comparison of ASCII values modified so
>>>>> that all
>>>>> the letters sort earlier than all the non-letters and so that
>>>>> a tilde
>>>>> sorts before anything, even the end of a part. For example,
>>>>> the fol-
>>>>> lowing parts are in sorted order: '~~', '~~a', '~', the
>>>>> empty part, 'a'.
>>>>>
>>>>> The - is lower than the . so it should be good provided the major
>>>>> releases are X.Y.0 instead of X.Y, i.e.:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2.0-rc3
>>>>> 2.0.0 # infarnalis
>>>>> 2.0.1 # first dot release
>>>>>
>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dropping the "release" word for stable releases is a good idea.
>>>>
>>>> FWIW I'd lean towards "labeled" scheme without the "release" label as
>>>> well. I don't have a strong opinion on X.Y vs X.Y.0 for formal
>>>> releases, but I would have probably gone with X.Y - just my 2c.
>>>
>>> The problem with X.Y is that it sorts before X.Y-rc3 instead of after.
>>
>> Stringwise, yes - though in Exherbo and Gentoo, X.Y-rc3 sorts before X.Y
>> because not all distros treat versions as strings.
>
> Interesting :-) Using X.Y.0 for the first stable release sorts the same,
> numerically or lexicographically, right ?
On Exherbo and Gentoo, X.Y == X.Y.0 by spec, and if both exist in a single
repository it's considered a spec violation on the part of the repository.
To be precise, both have explicit understanding of _alpha{int}, _beta{int},
_rc{int}, and _pre{int}, in that order of increasing comparison, all less
than X.Y. Exherbo mildly loosens the rules to allow a hyphen as a separator
between the version and the tag, while Gentoo does not.
(I might be wrong about where _pre sits; Gentoo has a spec (Package Manager
Spec or 'PMS') that actually lays it out, along with the full constraints on
version validity.)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
