Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 2/4] doc: changes to abi policy introducing major abi versions

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

08/11/2019 13:46, Ray Kinsella:
> This policy change introduces major ABI versions, these are
> declared every year, typically aligned with the LTS release
> and are supported by subsequent releases in the following year.
> This change is intended to improve ABI stabilty for those projects
> consuming DPDK.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>
> Acked-by: John Mcnamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>
> Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>

Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>

> ---
> +#. Major ABI versions are declared no more frequently than yearly. Compatibility
> +   with the major ABI version is mandatory in subsequent releases until a new
> +   major ABI version is declared.
> +#. Major ABI version are usually but not always declared aligned with a
> +   :ref:`LTS release <stable_lts_releases>`.

OK thanks

> +#. The ABI version is managed at a project level in DPDK, with the ABI version
> +   reflected in all library's soname.

It is not specifying the experimental lib exception.
But I can live without it.

> +A new major ABI version is declared no more frequently than yearly, with
> +declarations usually aligning with a LTS release, e.g. ABI 20 for DPDK 19.11.
> +Compatibility with the major ABI version is then mandatory in subsequent
> +releases until the next major ABI version is declared, e.g. ABI 21 for DPDK
> +20.11.

OK thanks

> +   Note that, this policy details the method by which the ABI may be changed,
> +   with due regard to preserving compatibility and observing deprecation
> +   notices. This process however should not be undertaken lightly, as a general
> +   rule ABI stability is extremely important for downstream consumers of DPDK.
> +   The API should only be changed for significant reasons, such as performance
> +   enhancements. API breakages due to changes such as reorganizing public
> +   structure fields for aesthetic or readability purposes should be avoided.

OK thanks

> +Libraries marked as ``experimental`` are entirely not considered part of an ABI
> +version, and may change without warning at any time. Experimental libraries
> +always have a major version of ``0`` to indicate they exist outside of
> +ABI Versioning, with the minor version incremented with each ABI change
> +to library.

OK