"Vincent S Hou" <[email protected]> wrote on 08/28/2018 03:14:38 PM:
>
> The version number we choose for openwhisk runtimes to be released
> under Apache as an incubator is a separate versioning system from
> what we have already as GitHub tags. The apache version will not
> break anything we have as legacy. The only difference it brings is
> just a new tag.
>
> If we pick up 1.12.0-incubating for all the runtimes, all the source
> code of runtimes are packaged in the artifacts available in
> Apache SVN server. When they are released, a new tag 1.12.0-
> incubating is added to the GitHub, but with some variations. Take
> nodejs for instance, we added two tags
> [email protected] and [email protected] to the same commit, so
> that nodejs 8 will push 1.12.0-incubating image to dockerhub and
> nodejs 6 will push 1.12.0-incubating as well. It is possible that
> the new 1.12.0-incubating nodejs 8 image equals to an existing
> image, like 1.9.0 or latest, but that is totally acceptable.
> The same rule applies to any other runtime repository.
>
> The old GitHub tagging system can still work and develop as planned.
> The new Apache versioning system can grow in parallel without any
> interference. Right now, the apache version always ends with -
> incubating because openwhisk is an incubator, so that we can clearly
> distinguish it. In future, when we graduate, we can make sure the
> apache version ends with -apache. All the docker images in dockerhub
> are tagged with -incubating or -apache, without affecting the
> existing GitHub tags we have.
>
> This is why I root for using the same Apache version for all the
> openwhisk runtimes. It does not influence anything we currently have.
>
>
Hi Vincent,
I don't object to starting at 1.12.0 (or whatever the lowest unused
number is across all previous tags). Version number space is cheap, we
can skip some to align if you really want to do it that way. I don't think
it is that useful, but I also don't think it is harmful.
However, I do think we need to stop using the old system and only
tag/release using the Apache process going forward. As pointed out in
Bertrand's blog post [1], there are very solid reasons to do it that way.
Assuming we do this, we will very quickly have runtimes having Apache
releases on their own cadence and the version numbers won't align with each
other or with openwhisk core. I think this is fine, but I think we should
realize now that is going to happen and not assume we will have aligned
version numbers any time in the future (except perhaps for 2.0, 3.0. etc).
--dave
[1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/success-at-apache-the-apache1
