From: Dan Mick <dan.mick@inktank.com>
To: Dennis Jacobfeuerborn <dennisml@conversis.de>
Cc: "Sage Weil" <sage@inktank.com>,
"Sébastien Han" <han.sebastien@gmail.com>,
"Mark Nelson" <mark.nelson@inktank.com>,
ceph-devel <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: v0.56 released
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 21:49:06 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50E51BD2.7040603@inktank.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50E50243.6060301@conversis.de>
On 01/02/2013 08:00 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> On 01/02/2013 09:46 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>>> On 01/02/2013 07:11 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, S?bastien Han wrote:
>>>>> Debian-testing shows the version 0.56-1, maybe I misunderstood but I
>>>>> thought that 0.56-1 bobtail was the new version of the stable branch.
>>>>> So I was expecting to see it here
>>>>> http://ceph.com/debian/dists/precise/main/binary-amd64/Packages
>>>>>
>>>>> Correct me if I'm wrong :)
>>>>
>>>> It will be soon, but we're doing some additional validation before calling
>>>> it bobtail. We may also move the URLs around a bit... more on that soon!
>>>
>>> What happens if you find a problem that needs a small update? Will the
>>> bobtail version be bumped to v0.57?
>>
>> v0.56.1, v0.56.2, etc., will follow in this series and bugs are found and
>> backported.
>
> That sound like an odd and potentially confusing versioning policy because
> v0.56 now is apparently a sort-of-stable-but-not-really version. I think if
> would be better to either go with something like v0.56rc1 until the release
> is actually declared stable or as some other projects do it use something
> like v0.55.99 as a pre-release version. That way you know if someone refers
> to v0.56 they actually mean the stable release.
> Right now if you find a problem and have to release v0.56.1 as bobtail then
> every time someone refers to v0.56 you have to ask them if they mean
> pre-bobtail v0.56 or post-bobtail v0.56. This kind of ambiguity should be
> avoided if possible.
>
> Regards,
> Dennis
The versioning in argonaut went 0.48argonaut, 0.48.1argonaut,
0.48.2argonaut, etc. i.e. the codename is the series/branch of
patch/fix releases, not just one point in the stream. The
truly-unambiguous version comes from any of the tools' -v option, which
outputs the coded release name and the SHA1 of the commit.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-03 5:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-01 6:02 v0.56 released Sage Weil
2013-01-02 2:24 ` Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
2013-01-02 2:28 ` Mark Nelson
2013-01-02 9:45 ` Sébastien Han
2013-01-02 17:35 ` Sage Weil
2013-01-02 18:03 ` Sébastien Han
2013-01-02 18:11 ` Sage Weil
2013-01-02 18:14 ` Sébastien Han
2013-01-02 20:27 ` Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
2013-01-02 20:46 ` Sage Weil
2013-01-03 4:00 ` Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
2013-01-03 5:49 ` Dan Mick [this message]
2013-01-03 8:28 ` norbi
2013-01-03 10:44 ` Joao Eduardo Luis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50E51BD2.7040603@inktank.com \
--to=dan.mick@inktank.com \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dennisml@conversis.de \
--cc=han.sebastien@gmail.com \
--cc=mark.nelson@inktank.com \
--cc=sage@inktank.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox