On 03/14/2018 07:04 PM, Joe Julian wrote: > > > On 03/14/2018 02:25 PM, Vijay Bellur wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY >> <kkeit...@redhat.com <mailto:kkeit...@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> On 03/12/2018 02:32 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: >> > On 03/12/2018 10:34 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote: >> >> * >> >> >> >> After 4.1, we want to move to either continuous >> numbering (like >> >> Fedora), or time based (like ubuntu etc) release >> numbers. Which >> >> is the model we pick is not yet finalized. Happy to >> hear opinions. >> >> >> >> >> >> Not sure how the time based release numbers would make more >> sense than >> >> the one which Fedora follows. But before I comment further on >> this I >> >> need to first get a clarity on how the op-versions will be >> managed. I'm >> >> assuming once we're at GlusterFS 4.1, post that the releases >> will be >> >> numbered as GlusterFS5, GlusterFS6 ... So from that >> perspective, are we >> >> going to stick to our current numbering scheme of op-version >> where for >> >> GlusterFS5 the op-version will be 50000? >> > >> > Say, yes. >> > >> > The question is why tie the op-version to the release number? That >> > mental model needs to break IMO. >> > >> > With current options like, >> > https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/Upgrade-Guide/op_version/ >> <https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/Upgrade-Guide/op_version/> it is >> > easier to determine the op-version of the cluster and what it >> should be, >> > and hence this need not be tied to the gluster release version. >> > >> > Thoughts? >> >> I'm okay with that, but—— >> >> Just to play the Devil's Advocate, having an op-version that bears >> some >> resemblance to the _version_ number may make it easy/easier to >> determine >> what the op-version ought to be. >> >> We aren't going to run out of numbers, so there's no reason to be >> "efficient" here. Let's try to make it easy. (Easy to not make a >> mistake.) >> >> My 2¢ >> >> >> +1 to the overall release cadence change proposal and what Kaleb >> mentions here. >> >> Tying op-versions to release numbers seems like an easier approach >> than others & one to which we are accustomed to. What are the benefits >> of breaking this model? >> > There is a bit of confusion among the user base when a release happens > but the op-version doesn't have a commensurate bump. People ask why they > can't set the op-version to match the gluster release version they have > installed. If it was completely disconnected from the release version, > that might be a great enough mental disconnect that the expectation > could go away which would actually cause less confusion.
Above is the reason I state it as well (the breaking of the mental model around this), why tie it together when it is not totally related. I also agree that, the notion is present that it is tied together and hence related, but it may serve us better to break it. Shyam _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list maintainers@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
