On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 11:11:49AM -0500, Adam Litke wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 11:12:06PM +0800, Shu Ming wrote:
> > One more comment about the test package version.  Most likely, the
> > package version will be the same version as the VDSM package
> > version.  The rule we need to consider is: Should we keep the back
> > compatibility with the VDSM files? Say allow newer version test
> > package running on older VDSM files? Or just allow run the same
> > version of test package and VDSM package.One more comment about the
> > test package version.  Most likely, the package version will be the
> > same version as the VDSM package version.  The rule we need to
> > consider is: Should we keep the back compatibility with the VDSM
> > files? Say allow newer version test package running on older VDSM
> > files? Or just allow run the same version of test package and VDSM
> > package.
>
> Backwards-compatible tests is not a good idea in my opinion.  I would say that
> the test rpm should require the exact same vdsm version.
+1
_______________________________________________
vdsm-devel mailing list
vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel

Reply via email to