I have RFCXXXX at version 1.0.0. I make some backwards compatible changes. I then make a backwards incompatible change. Then I add more backwards compatible changes. Then I remove the backwards incompatible change. What are the resulting version numbers?
Rhetoric question: How many IETF module authors will get this all done correctly during module revision (and which problem does all of this fix)? /js On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 03:24:33PM +0000, Sterne, Jason (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) wrote: > Hi guys, > > In the latest working copy of the YANG Semver draft we added some text in > section 5 about how to select revision labels for modules that are under > development, or for RFCs that are churning (i.e. bis versions). > > https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-ver-dt/blob/master/yang-semver/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-semver.txt > > I think we probably need to require that same information for any revision > label scheme. I'd suggest we put something along these lines into the > module-versioning draft: > > Any revision label scheme MUST describe how labels are selected for new YANG > modules that are under development, and how labels are selected for modules > in IETF RFCs that are being updated (e.g. a "bis" version is under > development). > > (should we drop the "in IETF RFCs" ? ) > > Jason > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
