[Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT in the master branch: http://gerrit.ovirt.org/11143 -- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
Nice to see -SNAPSHOT in the version. ----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 1:04:28 PM Subject: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT in the master branch:
http://gerrit.ovirt.org/11143 -- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 1:04:28 PM Subject: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT in the master branch:
Usually you put SNAPSHOT to maven artifacts but _master suffix to tarball and package, no?
http://gerrit.ovirt.org/11143 -- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote:
Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT in the master branch:
+1
-- Michael Pasternak RedHat, ENG-Virtualization R&D
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote:
Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT in the master branch:
+1 I agree, and this is not the only place where should start marking "3.3.0" - what about upgrade scripts?
--
Michael Pasternak RedHat, ENG-Virtualization R&D _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:27:36 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote:
Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT in the master branch:
+1 I agree, and this is not the only place where should start marking
and cluster compatibility version..
"3.3.0" - what about upgrade scripts?
--
Michael Pasternak RedHat, ENG-Virtualization R&D _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
On 01/21/2013 10:28 AM, Omer Frenkel wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:27:36 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote:
Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT in the master branch:
+1 I agree, and this is not the only place where should start marking
and cluster compatibility version..
all above is true, but Juan meant preparing MVN infra for the next development iteration, while you're talking about engine internals, maybe we should file BZs on that (as next version tasks) or should we define new process of preparing for the next version that will include both?
"3.3.0" - what about upgrade scripts?
--
Michael Pasternak RedHat, ENG-Virtualization R&D _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Michael Pasternak RedHat, ENG-Virtualization R&D
On 01/21/2013 09:45 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 01/21/2013 10:28 AM, Omer Frenkel wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:27:36 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote:
Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT in the master branch:
+1 I agree, and this is not the only place where should start marking
and cluster compatibility version..
all above is true, but Juan meant preparing MVN infra for the next development iteration, while you're talking about engine internals, maybe we should file BZs on that (as next version tasks) or should we define new process of preparing for the next version that will include both?
As I don't see hard opposition to this change I will merge it tomorrow. Please raise your hand iif you think it shouldn't be merged. http://gerrit.ovirt.org/11143 -- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:44:33 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/21/2013 09:45 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 01/21/2013 10:28 AM, Omer Frenkel wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:27:36 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote:
Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT in the master branch:
+1 I agree, and this is not the only place where should start marking
and cluster compatibility version..
all above is true, but Juan meant preparing MVN infra for the next development iteration, while you're talking about engine internals, maybe we should file BZs on that (as next version tasks) or should we define new process of preparing for the next version that will include both?
As I don't see hard opposition to this change I will merge it tomorrow. Please raise your hand iif you think it shouldn't be merged.
For the poms, why didn't you use a variable that is inherited? But Java is not my domain. Tarball should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0_master.tar.gz RPM release should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0-0.0.master This will enable us to release milestones, such as beta1, beta2, rc1, rc2 and finally release without suffix. Regards, Alon
On 01/29/2013 04:52 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:44:33 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/21/2013 09:45 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 01/21/2013 10:28 AM, Omer Frenkel wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:27:36 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote: > Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT > in > the master branch:
+1 I agree, and this is not the only place where should start marking
and cluster compatibility version..
all above is true, but Juan meant preparing MVN infra for the next development iteration, while you're talking about engine internals, maybe we should file BZs on that (as next version tasks) or should we define new process of preparing for the next version that will include both?
As I don't see hard opposition to this change I will merge it tomorrow. Please raise your hand iif you think it shouldn't be merged.
For the poms, why didn't you use a variable that is inherited? But Java is not my domain.
Maven doesn't support use of variables in any of the coordinates of the artifacts or of their parents. If you use variables, specially if you use them in the "version" of the parent project and the variable is inherited from the parent project, there is no way to determine which version of the parent project should be used.
Tarball should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0_master.tar.gz RPM release should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0-0.0.master
This will enable us to release milestones, such as beta1, beta2, rc1, rc2 and finally release without suffix.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:41:13 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/29/2013 04:52 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:44:33 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/21/2013 09:45 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 01/21/2013 10:28 AM, Omer Frenkel wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:27:36 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> > To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> > Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? > > On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote: >> Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to >> 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT >> in >> the master branch: > > +1 I agree, and this is not the only place where should start marking
and cluster compatibility version..
all above is true, but Juan meant preparing MVN infra for the next development iteration, while you're talking about engine internals, maybe we should file BZs on that (as next version tasks) or should we define new process of preparing for the next version that will include both?
As I don't see hard opposition to this change I will merge it tomorrow. Please raise your hand iif you think it shouldn't be merged.
For the poms, why didn't you use a variable that is inherited? But Java is not my domain.
Maven doesn't support use of variables in any of the coordinates of the artifacts or of their parents. If you use variables, specially if you use them in the "version" of the parent project and the variable is inherited from the parent project, there is no way to determine which version of the parent project should be used.
That's correct, but you can set the version numbers of the ovirt artifacts to ${parent.version}. But let's do it in a next patch, we already spent enough time on this :) Merge!
Tarball should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0_master.tar.gz RPM release should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0-0.0.master
This will enable us to release milestones, such as beta1, beta2, rc1, rc2 and finally release without suffix.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak@redhat.com> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 6:57:51 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:41:13 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/29/2013 04:52 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:44:33 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/21/2013 09:45 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 01/21/2013 10:28 AM, Omer Frenkel wrote:
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> > Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, > engine-devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:27:36 AM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> >> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> >> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org >> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM >> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? >> >> On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote: >>> Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to >>> 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT >>> in >>> the master branch: >> >> +1 > I agree, and this is not the only place where should start > marking
and cluster compatibility version..
all above is true, but Juan meant preparing MVN infra for the next development iteration, while you're talking about engine internals, maybe we should file BZs on that (as next version tasks) or should we define new process of preparing for the next version that will include both?
As I don't see hard opposition to this change I will merge it tomorrow. Please raise your hand iif you think it shouldn't be merged.
For the poms, why didn't you use a variable that is inherited? But Java is not my domain.
Maven doesn't support use of variables in any of the coordinates of the artifacts or of their parents. If you use variables, specially if you use them in the "version" of the parent project and the variable is inherited from the parent project, there is no way to determine which version of the parent project should be used.
That's correct, but you can set the version numbers of the ovirt artifacts to ${parent.version}. But let's do it in a next patch, we already spent enough time on this :) Merge!
It this is correct, there is no point in merge and fix. Fix and merge.
Tarball should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0_master.tar.gz RPM release should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0-0.0.master
This will enable us to release milestones, such as beta1, beta2, rc1, rc2 and finally release without suffix.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
On 01/29/2013 05:58 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak@redhat.com> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org, "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 6:57:51 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:41:13 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/29/2013 04:52 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:44:33 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/21/2013 09:45 AM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
On 01/21/2013 10:28 AM, Omer Frenkel wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> >> To: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> >> Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, >> engine-devel@ovirt.org >> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:27:36 AM >> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Michael Pasternak" <mpastern@redhat.com> >>> To: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> >>> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org >>> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:24:58 PM >>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT? >>> >>> On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote: >>>> Once 3.2.0 is released I think we should move to >>>> 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT >>>> in >>>> the master branch: >>> >>> +1 >> I agree, and this is not the only place where should start >> marking > > and cluster compatibility version..
all above is true, but Juan meant preparing MVN infra for the next development iteration, while you're talking about engine internals, maybe we should file BZs on that (as next version tasks) or should we define new process of preparing for the next version that will include both?
As I don't see hard opposition to this change I will merge it tomorrow. Please raise your hand iif you think it shouldn't be merged.
For the poms, why didn't you use a variable that is inherited? But Java is not my domain.
Maven doesn't support use of variables in any of the coordinates of the artifacts or of their parents. If you use variables, specially if you use them in the "version" of the parent project and the variable is inherited from the parent project, there is no way to determine which version of the parent project should be used.
That's correct, but you can set the version numbers of the ovirt artifacts to ${parent.version}. But let's do it in a next patch, we already spent enough time on this :) Merge!
It this is correct, there is no point in merge and fix. Fix and merge.
"${parent.version}" is the default value for "version" when there is a parent, and we don't override it in any of our projects.
Tarball should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0_master.tar.gz RPM release should be ovirt-engine-3.3.0-0.0.master
This will enable us to release milestones, such as beta1, beta2, rc1, rc2 and finally release without suffix.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
Note that this change has just been merged. Let me know if you find any issue. -- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
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 ----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
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.$(date +%Y%m%d%H%M%S).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 5:26:25 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
Note that this change has just been merged. Let me know if you find any issue.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 5:38:33 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/30/2013 04:31 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
Hi,
You merge this with the rpm version to 3.3.0 which is totally invalid. 3.3.0 is a *RELEASE*. I really don't care what maven approach is, but please do not create issues with product release cycle.
Alon
That is not true. After this patch the default RPM version is 3.3.0-0.1.$(date +%Y%m%d%H%M%S).
3.3.0 is a release. 0.1.* is the BUILD. And make dist produces ovirt-engine-3.3.0.tar.gz which is a release. You are confusing between upstream and downstream, we will have to fix this before we support more distributions.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
On 01/30/2013 05:13 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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.
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@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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. 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@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
On 01/30/2013 05:33 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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.
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@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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. 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@redhat.com> > Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
On 01/30/2013 05:58 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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.
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@redhat.com> >> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> > Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> >>> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
Hi Alon,
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.
Not that I want to join the flamewar :) but the maven version should be exposed to the outside world when we publish maven artifacts. I think the best candidate is the rest-api client, but also (in the future) backend plugin projects. I do not think java developers will want to resolve those artifacts from RPM packages... on Mac os X for example. 0.0.0 will not be OK for all the versions, because it will not be refreshed after its first succesful download. I think you know this, since you created and published into the ovirt maven repo at sonatype for otopi.
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 don't you just send a patch that fixes the linux packaging issue? Than you, Laszlo
On 01/30/2013 06:22 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> >> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> >> Cc: engine-devel@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.
The maven version is exposed to the outside world, not much today, only that the POM files are published in every installation done in Fedora. And it will be much more exposed in the future, when other people starts to develop components based in our (yet to be created) plugin infrastructure. So it can't be 0.0.0 for all 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.
This patch didn't create any relation between maven and packaging version, it was already there, and I think is reasonable to have it (to the extent that packaging systems allow). So if a decision is made to release 3.3.0-beta2, for example, the corresponding branch should have a patch to change the maven version to 3.3.0-beta2, and the packaging version to 3.3.0-beta2 as well.
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.
What do you mean by "published snapshots"? As far as I know we don't publish maven artifacts to any public repository at the moment. Or do you mean nightly builds?
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@redhat.com> >>>> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 7:44:42 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Time to move to 3.3.0-SNAPSHOT?
On 01/30/2013 06:22 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> > Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> >>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> >>> Cc: engine-devel@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.
The maven version is exposed to the outside world, not much today, only that the POM files are published in every installation done in Fedora. And it will be much more exposed in the future, when other people starts to develop components based in our (yet to be created) plugin infrastructure. So it can't be 0.0.0 for all versions.
When we make public API, we stabilize an interface and publish versioned artifacts. Please notice that the version will not be the product version but the interface version. For example engine-api-1.0.0 will be available at ovirt-engine-3.2.0, ovirt-engine-3.3.0 and ovirt-engine-4.0.0, as what the developer cares about is the interface version and not the product version. We do not have any consumer right now, so maven version is not important, nor the snapshot attribute used now. So as far as I understand the maven version is "also a nice goal" but does not has any actual effect.
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.
This patch didn't create any relation between maven and packaging version, it was already there, and I think is reasonable to have it (to the extent that packaging systems allow). So if a decision is made to release 3.3.0-beta2, for example, the corresponding branch should have a patch to change the maven version to 3.3.0-beta2, and the packaging version to 3.3.0-beta2 as well.
I will create such a patch, after we complete the discussion.
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.
What do you mean by "published snapshots"? As far as I know we don't publish maven artifacts to any public repository at the moment. Or do you mean nightly builds?
Yes. Again, I don't care about maven, as long as not use by any other component it is meaningless.
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@redhat.com> >>>>> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L.
On 01/30/2013 05:31 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.
There should be no issues with "product release cycle", carrying next development iteration with [VERSION+1]-SNAPSHOT is a standard, this way people know that they working against yet not officially released version. release should drop -SNAPSHOT prefix and at the end of release procedure, bump version and add -SNAPSHOT back.
Alon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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.
-- Dirección Comercial: C/Jose Bardasano Baos, 9, Edif. Gorbea 3, planta 3ºD, 28016 Madrid, Spain Inscrita en el Reg. Mercantil de Madrid – C.I.F. B82657941 - Red Hat S.L. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
-- Michael Pasternak RedHat, ENG-Virtualization R&D
participants (6)
-
Alon Bar-Lev -
Juan Hernandez -
Laszlo Hornyak -
Michael Pasternak -
Omer Frenkel -
Yair Zaslavsky