On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Christian Hopps <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> writes: > > > Christian Hopps <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Versioning has come up in previous conversations I've been a part of, > >> and I was led to believe that it does not really exist for yang > >> modules. That is, if you update a published module it's a completely new > >> model with no-expectation of compatibility with previous models. > > > > Please see section 10 of RFC 6020. > > Ok, so I either misunderstood, or was misled. :) > > So my reading of section 10 is that a new revision is the "bump the > minor" action, and a new module is required for "bump the major". > > There are no major or minor revision numbers in YANG. There are on revision date strings YYYY-MM-DD. > Thanks, > Chris. > > Andy > > > > >> Is it the case that there's no way to "bump the minor version" of a > >> model (i.e., you make only additions, but no deletions or changes to > >> meaning so that the model can be considered backward compatible)? > > > > All rules in section 10 of RFC 6020 are backwards compatible. > > > > Also note that you can deprecate and obsolete nodes and define new > > nodes in the same module. > > > > > > > > /martin > > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
