On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Vineet Goel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Apologies for any confusion. Let me expand further: > > 1) My proposal was to update the JIRA versions. I didn't think > 2.0.0-incubating and 2.0.0 are the same, we should either consolidate them > as one, or change the JIRA version numbers to be numerically different. > Version 2.0.0 shows 5 open JIRAs that may or may not belong to > "2.0.0-incubating" release. See link: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ/fixforversion/12334195/?selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.jira-projects-plugin:version-summary-panel > vs > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ/fixforversion/12334000/?selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.jira-projects-plugin:version-summary-panel > > We should update the 5 JIRAs listed in 2.0.0 with the correct status and > fix versions. This will make it easy to track the upcoming release. > > > Agree. What I meant is also to consolidate the two into "2.0.0-incubating" or "2.0.0.0-incubating" depending on which version schema we will choose. > 2) Regarding the 4-digit versioning in the code, that's a good discussion > to have. > What is the proposed convention for managing the 4 digits and what sort of > code/API changes trigger a change in specific digits ? It would be good to > discuss the details. > The 4-digit x.y.z.w versioning is: x: means major release y. means minor release z. means bug fix release w. used for hot fix release Catalog and data format changes need x or y change. From the number changes, end users know whether it needs a hawq upgrade. for this scheme, API changes are not reflected in the number. For 3-digit semantic versioning, the rules to increase the number is quite different, the number change does not reflect catalog changes or data format changes but it reflects API changes. > > Thanks > -Vineet > > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:35 PM, Ruilong Huo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I would prefer the option 1 to keep the 4-digit versions. This mechanism > > address the compatible issues of library in a more proper manner. > > > > PS, here are some background of the hawq versioning policy which might > > help: > > Postgres based systems, including GPDB and HAWQ, have > > the notion of "MODULE_MAGIC" which is intended for the > > purpose of guaranteeing version compatibility. In addition > > to the "MAGIC NUMBER", defined as the Major.Minor version > > , GPDB and HAWQ also have the notion of a "MAGIC > > PRODUCT" which GPDB uses to differentiate itself from > > Postgres and provide clear messages regarding "this > > library was built against Postgres" this mechanism > > could be easily employed to differentiate HAWQ and GPDB > > and allow basing the "MAGIC NUMBER" off of the HAWQ version > > instead of the GPDB version as it does today. > > > > Best regards, > > Ruilong Huo > > > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Radar Da lei <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > For Lei's proposal, I would prefer option 1 for below reasons: > > > > > > 1. Save time we may spend to solve incompatible issues. > > > 2. It will be hard to maintain semantic version if we increase major > > > version every time when we are changing catalog and interface. If so, > > HAWQ > > > version will reach 10.0.0 very soon. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Radar > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Lei Chang <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > This is indeed a confusing issue. I am even confused by what Vineet > > > > proposed. > > > > > > > > There are several versions currently used across the systems: > > > > > > > > 1) the 3-digit JIRA versions: currently it has 2.0.0-incubating and > > > 2.0.0. > > > > and i think they are the same, "2.0.0-incubating" is more formal for > > > > incubating project. > > > > > > > > 2) the 4-digit versions in the code which is inherited from postgres > > and > > > > will be shown in "select version()" command; it is somewhat related > to > > > > library compatibility and it is also related to third party tools. > Some > > > > tools may read and parse versions, and changing from 4 digit to 3 > digit > > > > might introduce some unknown incompatibility issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > So currently there are 2 options: > > > > > > > > 1. Keep 4-digit version scheme, changing everything to 4 digit > > versions, > > > > and release it. > > > > > > > > 2. Change everything to 3 digits and this might introduce some > unknown > > > > incompatibility issues. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > Lei > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Vineet Goel <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > 1) Proposal - we can rename the 2.0.0 version to 2.0.1-incubating > as > > > the > > > > > next planned maintenance release (for now). All JIRAs targeted for > > > 2.0.0 > > > > > should be evaluated to see if any belong to the scope for the > > upcoming > > > > > 2.0.0-incubating > > > > > release or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Regarding comments on JIRA-875, I have created a new JIRA > > (HAWQ-895) > > > > for > > > > > the investigation on migrating to semantic versioning. That raises > > the > > > > > question, should version 2.0.0-incubating really be > > 2.0.0.0-incubating > > > ? > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-895 > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > -Vineet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Goden Yao <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to raise some concerns around HAWQ versions we used in > > Apache > > > > > JIRA. > > > > > > We right now have: > > > > > > > > > > > > - 2.0.0-incubating (this is the upcoming release we're working > > on) > > > > > > - 2.0.0 (this was used for JIRAs after originally planned > > > > > > 2.0.0-incubating) , now I see a little bit issue if we releae > > > > > > 2.0.0-incubating , what leaves with items associated with this > > > > > version? > > > > > > - 2.1.0 - supposedly , this is the next minor release > > > > > > - 3.0.0 - supposedly, this is the next major release > > > > > > - Backlog > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then I see this JIRA: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-875 > > > > > > (*Upgrade > > > > > > HAWQ version to 2.0.1.0*), which is not a version listed on the > > > release > > > > > > page. > > > > > > Can we: > > > > > > > > > > > > - Clarify which version is for which release (goals, purpose, > > > etc.) > > > > > see > > > > > > example I did for 2.0.0-incubating: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/HAWQ/HAWQ+Release+2.0.0-incubating > > > > > > > > > > > > - When you file JIRA, make sure you have a targeted version > for > > it > > > > so > > > > > > it's easy to track from release perspective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > -Goden > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
