stable bcache-tools?

stable bcache-tools?

[Paul B. Henson]

Is there going to be a release cut of bcache-tools at some point so
distributions could have a stable version to package? Is the current git
head pretty much considered production ready and bug free?

Thanks...

Re: stable bcache-tools?

[Kent Overstreet]

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 06:16:23PM -0800, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> Is there going to be a release cut of bcache-tools at some point so
> distributions could have a stable version to package? Is the current git
> head pretty much considered production ready and bug free?

The current git head should be completely fine for production usage -
there's not really anything complicated enough (save the udev stuff,
maybe) to merit tagging a specific version as stable. I suppose
distributions could use some kind of hint that useful changes have gone
in and they should package a new version - anything in particular you
want there?

Re: stable bcache-tools?

[Paul B. Henson]

On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 05:05:37PM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote:

> The current git head should be completely fine for production usage -
> there's not really anything complicated enough (save the udev stuff,
> maybe) to merit tagging a specific version as stable. I suppose
> distributions could use some kind of hint that useful changes have gone
> in and they should package a new version - anything in particular you
> want there?

No, it's just that my distribution, Gentoo, only has the option of a
stale snapshot from months ago or a live build that just pulls git head.
In general, I just like stable software to have tagged releases, so
distributions can ship the same stuff. The maintainer of mcelog, for
example, doesn't tag releases, and expects distributions to just grab
whatever's there the day they package, so there's really no continuity
between distributions as far as what you end up with. There doesn't even
need to be a tarball packaged or anything, just a simple tag in git
identifying a "release" so distributions can package it.

Thanks...

Re: stable bcache-tools?

[Kent Overstreet]

On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 12:46:37PM -0800, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 05:05:37PM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> 
> > The current git head should be completely fine for production usage -
> > there's not really anything complicated enough (save the udev stuff,
> > maybe) to merit tagging a specific version as stable. I suppose
> > distributions could use some kind of hint that useful changes have gone
> > in and they should package a new version - anything in particular you
> > want there?
> 
> No, it's just that my distribution, Gentoo, only has the option of a
> stale snapshot from months ago or a live build that just pulls git head.
> In general, I just like stable software to have tagged releases, so
> distributions can ship the same stuff. The maintainer of mcelog, for
> example, doesn't tag releases, and expects distributions to just grab
> whatever's there the day they package, so there's really no continuity
> between distributions as far as what you end up with. There doesn't even
> need to be a tarball packaged or anything, just a simple tag in git
> identifying a "release" so distributions can package it.

Heh, I see. Ok, I'll tag a release :p

(there really should be some standardized announce mechanism/channel
from packages -> distros. hrm).

Re: stable bcache-tools?

[Paul B. Henson]

On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 04:55:59PM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote:

> Heh, I see. Ok, I'll tag a release :p

Cool, thanks.

> (there really should be some standardized announce mechanism/channel
> from packages -> distros. hrm).

Yah, I guess some devs watch mailing lists, others subscribe to stuff
like freshmeat.net (although I guess that's freecode.com now). At least
for Gentoo, depending on the package some devs keep track of it
themselves, and for others users open a bug report with a version bump
request when they see something new out.

Maybe you could just announce tagged releases on this mailing list for now?

Thanks...