Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 7:17:11 PM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? > > On 01/30/2013 05:58 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 6:49:10 PM >>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? >>> >>> On 01/30/2013 05:33 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>> Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 6:30:55 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? >>>>> >>>>> On 01/30/2013 05:13 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>> From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>> Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 5:38:33 PM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 01/30/2013 04:31 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You merge this with the rpm version to 3.3.0 which is totally >>>>>>>> invalid. >>>>>>>> 3.3.0 is a *RELEASE*. >>>>>>>> I really don't care what maven approach is, but please do not >>>>>>>> create issues with product release cycle. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Alon >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is not true. After this patch the default RPM version is >>>>>>> 3.3.0-0.1.$(date +%Y%m%d%H%M%S). >>>>>> >>>>>> 3.3.0 is a release. >>>>>> >>>>>> 0.1.* is the BUILD. >>>>> >>>>> In RPM terms 3.3.0 is the "version", and "0.1.*" is the >>>>> "release", >>>>> see here: >>>>> >>>>> [1] http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-tags.html >>>>> >>>>>> And make dist produces ovirt-engine-3.3.0.tar.gz which is a >>>>>> release. >>>>> >>>>> ovirt-engine-3.3.0.tar.gz is not a release, it is just the name >>>>> of >>>>> a >>>>> tar >>>>> file generated by the makefile. The release is the act of the >>>>> release >>>>> managers, on behalf of the community, announcing and publishing >>>>> some >>>>> artifacts, maybe including a tarball generated with the >>>>> makefile, >>>>> maybe >>>>> one generated manually, as they see fit. >>>> >>>> This where you are wrong, the name of the source tarball is very >>>> important in open source, as this is what open source project >>>> actually releases. >>> >>> The name of the tarball that is published as part of the release >>> is >>> important, that I agree, maybe not "very" important, but important >>> anyhow. But what you are saying is that if the name of the file >>> generated by default by the Makefile is not exactly the same as >>> the >>> tarball that will be published as part of the release then it is >>> "totally invalid". That is going too far, in my opinion. >> >> It is important as the version not only appear at the tarball but >> within resources such as script --version or Help->About. >> >> It is also important as people generate their own builds from tags, >> and expect to get proper version of tarball and content within. >> >> This is not new, this is common to most of the open source world, >> oVirt is the exception in this case. > > All of those are nice goals. None of them has been made impossible by > this patch, only that we are using a cleaner maven versioning schema, > which is also a nice goal. > The maven version is not exposed to the outside world, for all I know it can be 0.0.0 for all past and future versions.

Creating a relation between the maven version and the packaging version and not vise versa was what I discussed before you applied this patch, and you are CC on the discussions regarding that.

I would have preferred we set proper versioning scheme for 3.3.0 for the entire package. Of course we can fix everything, remove the published snapshots, and start over, I would have liked to avoid that.

>> >> Why do we want to be an exception? >> >>> >>>> >>>> We will discuss this offline. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> You are confusing between upstream and downstream, we will have >>>>>> to >>>>>> fix this before we support more distributions. >>>>> >>>>> I may be confused, of course, but I don't see the connection >>>>> between >>>>> the >>>>> name of the tarball generated by the makefile and supporting >>>>> more >>>>> distributions, looks to me like the least important thing in >>>>> these >>>>> regards. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>>> From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>>>>> Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org >>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 5:26:25 PM >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note that this change has just been merged. Let me know if >>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>> find >>>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>>> issue.