On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Martin Pool <[email protected]> wrote: > (Launchpad bounced my mail during the upgrade today) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Martin Pool <[email protected]> > Date: 2009/9/24 > Subject: which version of bzr for launchpad? > To: Launchpad Community Development Team > <[email protected]>, Robert Collins > <[email protected]>, John Arbash Meinel > <[email protected]>, Ian Clatworthy > <[email protected]>, Vincent Ladeuil > <[email protected]>, Andrew Bennetts > <[email protected]> > > > I had a talk to jml and thumper about this recently, and thought I > would send a note here for the larger audience. > > Bazaar now maintains two branches, a stable/bugfix-only 2.0 branch, > and an ongoing development branch 2.1dev. (See > <http://doc.bazaar-vcs.org/developers/cycle.html>). As much as we > can, we will make no changes to 2.0 that will break api compatibility, > or any other kind. They will be able to interoperate on both the > network and formats. The development branch may introduce new data > formats, though we don't immediately anticipate doing this. It likely > will add new smartserver verbs, but it will have a fallback for older > servers. 2.1 will still be tested and get the same degree of care we > always have, but we'll be a bit more free to remove deprecated or > non-user-affecting compatibility code. So the only difference is the > rate of change, not the degree of quality. > > The question then arises which version Launchpad should run for > codehosting, and the answer is that it will run the development > branch, 2.1b1 etc. People using old clients should be fine, and > people using new features or formats introduced in the development > branch will be able to use them against Launchpad. As we change APIs, > Launchpad may need to update their own code, but they do this anyhow > as part of their monthly integrations and it is not onerous. >
The subject of your email is phrased as a question, but the content is an answer, and I think it's a good one. > Launchpad will at some point in the future add an edge codehost, which > will run Launchpad's own tip, then be merged to the lpnet (ie stable) > servers in monthly releases. edge will run only slightly ahead with > the bzr version, for example being on 2.1b2 when lpnet is on 2.1b1. > This gives some opportunity for testing. > FWIW, the edge codehosting service is waiting on our IS team to do some network configuration. > The biggest risk seems to be that a change in 2.1.x may introduce > bugs, either to do with operation with old clients or otherwise. The > best way to address this is (aside from general quality development) > to test each release as it's integrated on the staging and edge > codehost. At least this way we will find any such issues earlier in > bzr's cycle rather than at the 2.1rc1 point. > > It may be interesting in the future to allow the client to specify the > remote bzr commandname as eg 'bzr-2.0' and then we could have several > available servers on the Launchpad side; this would require including > multiple bzr trees in the deployment. > This would indeed be interesting. It would require a lot of work. jml _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
