On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Resurrecting this thread since we need to make a decision soon. The
> opinions broke down like so:
>
> A - me
> B - john
> C - alex
> D - loic (and drop release names), yehuda, ilya
> openstack - dmsimard
>
> So, most people seem to like D (below):
>
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, 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
>
> This initialy made me a bit sad because it wasn't my favorite. My
> aesthetic issues aside, though, I think more explicit dev vs release
> distinction is important and useful. I think the main issue is the
> strings in the version which will cause pain for some distros.
>
> Would this make sense instead?
>
> x.0.z - development releases
> x.1.z - release candidate(s)
> x.2.z - release and bugfix updates
The problem with encoding information about the kind of release into
digits is that you have to know what they mean. I guarantee you that
people are going to install dev release by mistake (because it's a
higher-valued point release!) if we go this route.
I didn't vote before because I don't know much about the difficulty
any of these will cause in packaging and distros, but just in terms of
clarity and user experience I really prefer "vanilla" D to the
others...
-Greg
>
> John preferred B (even/odd) because it encodes the important info in the
> x.y portion of the version; I think the above does that too, and a bit
> more succinctly.
>
> What do you think?
>
> If that works for people, the follow-up question is what initial X value
> we should choose. We could go with 1 (and live with the baggage
> associated with what "1.0" is supposed to mean), or with 9 (J is the 9th
> letter). And if we do that, should we make the hammer release 8.2.0 or
> stick with 0.94?
>
> sage
> --
> 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
--
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
