hi Christopher, Yes, we're updating lustre-version.ac - you can follow the progress under bug #22234.
I think we should be able to accommodate your request to add the additional field you mentioned. Could I ask you to file a bug for this and cc: me? As for replacing the timestamp with "git describe", I think that's a worthwhile discussion. Does anyone on this list see any reason we shouldn't do this? kind regards, melanie Christopher J. Morrone wrote: > I assume that there will be some modifications to > lustre/autoconf/lustre-version.ac and elsewhere to support this? > > While you are in there, I'd like to request that you add a field for > third-party folks to add their own version. For instance, we add a > "-20chaos" tag to our version numbers to distinguish them from > Sun/Oracle releases. But to get that number into Lustre we are > currently using the LUSTRE_VERS environment variable, which has at > least two problems: > > 1) Our branch of lustre does not contain OUR version number. All of > the scripting to embed our additional version number are in external > scripts. If someone takes one of our tags and builds it, the > resulting rpm will have a normal upstream version number. That could > lead to unnecessary confusion about what they are running. > > 2) Our automated rpm builder operates on src rpms only. > Unfortunately, even if we set LUSTRE_VERS when we generate the src > rpm, that version isn't retained anywhere when the binary rpms are > built from the src rpm. So we wind up having scripts to rewrite the > spec on the fly to embed the version number. > > It would just be alot easier if there was an additional version field > for third-parties. > > To digress further: > > Now that we are all using git, the date that is embedded in snapshot > builds of lustre is not terribly useful. I would like to propose that > we start using "git describe" instead of a timestamp. For those that > haven't seen that command before: > > $ git describe > 1.8.2.0-20chaos-2-g4d485b2 > > That says that I am currently 2 commits beyond the refspec > 1.8.2.0-20chaos (an annotated tag in this case, but it could also be a > branch name), and the commit is 4d485b2. (No, I don't know why the > "g" is in there. :)) > > If that is too long, maybe just a commit number? > > Melanie Gao wrote: >> hello Lustre users, >> >> My name is Melanie Gao. I'm a program manager in the Lustre team and >> will be managing the release that comes after 2.0. >> >> We're making some changes to the way we number Lustre builds and I >> wanted to give you a heads-up. Here's a summary of the changes: >> >> 1. The first build of a release will be called 2.x.0.001. So for >> example for a Lustre 2.1 release, the first build would be 2.1.0.001. >> >> 2. We will increment the dot-dot-dot numbers monotonically (by one's >> instead of by ten's). That is to say, the builds will be numbered as >> follows: >> 2.1.0.001 >> 2.1.0.002 >> 2.1.0.003 >> >> 3. We will append "alpha" or "beta" at the end of every build so that >> it's clear that it's not the GA build. If the build is a milestone >> build we'll append "alpha1" or "beta1". That is to say, the builds will >> be numbered as follows: >> 2.1.0.001.alpha (not a milestone) >> 2.1.0.002.alpha (not a milestone) >> 2.1.0.003.alpha1 (first alpha milestone build) >> 2.1.0.004.alpha (not a milestone) >> 2.1.0.005.alpha2 (second alpha milestone build) >> ... >> 2.1.0.012.beta1 (first beta milestone build) >> 2.1.0.013.beta (not a milestone) >> 2.1.0.014.beta2 (second beta milestone build) >> >> 4. The final GA build will have nothing appended at the end but we >> will make it clear when we release it that it's the GA build. Assuming >> build 35 was the GA build for Lustre 2.1, the final build number >> would be 2.1.0.035. >> >> If you have any questions please respond to this email and I'll be happy >> to answer them. >> >> kind regards, >> melanie >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Lustre-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://*lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss >> >> > _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
