diff options
| author | Rainer Gerhards <rgerhards@adiscon.com> | 2008-03-31 09:04:52 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Rainer Gerhards <rgerhards@adiscon.com> | 2008-03-31 09:04:52 +0000 |
| commit | eddf674157b304f167d965ccff80ec223b7f9ab1 (patch) | |
| tree | 9a25c43bd8b5c2d082a54cf0f2435e83fee055af | |
| parent | b88b98d07e91cbf1ab7642f544c20ed0f2447603 (diff) | |
| download | rsyslog-eddf674157b304f167d965ccff80ec223b7f9ab1.tar.gz rsyslog-eddf674157b304f167d965ccff80ec223b7f9ab1.tar.xz rsyslog-eddf674157b304f167d965ccff80ec223b7f9ab1.zip | |
proposed new solution for version naming (to be discussed)
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/version_naming.html | 157 |
1 files changed, 127 insertions, 30 deletions
diff --git a/doc/version_naming.html b/doc/version_naming.html index a685f5ff..8c1b9187 100644 --- a/doc/version_naming.html +++ b/doc/version_naming.html @@ -1,33 +1,130 @@ -<html> -<head> -<title>rsyslog bugs and annoyances</title> -</head> +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> +<html><head><title>rsyslog version naming</title></head> <body> <h1>Version Naming</h1> -<p>This document briefly outlines the strategy for naming versions. It applies -to versions 1.0.0 and above. Versions below that are all unstable and have a -different naming schema.</p> -<p><b>Please note that version naming is currently being changed. There is a -<a href="http://rgerhards.blogspot.com/2007/08/on-rsyslog-versions.html">blog +<p style="font-weight: bold;">This is the proposal on how versions should be named in the future:</p><p>Rsyslog version naming has undergone a number of changes in +the past. Our sincere hopes is that the scheme outlined here will serve +us well for the future. In general, a three-number versioning scheme +with a potential development state indication is used. It follows this +pattern:</p> +<p>major.minor.patchlevel[-devstate]</p> +<p>where devstate has some forther structure: +-<releaseReason><releaseNumber></p> +<p>All stable builds come without the devstate part. All unstable +development version come with it.</p> +<p>The <span style="font-weight: bold;">major</span> +version is incremented whenever something really important happens. A +single new feature, even if important, does not justify an increase in +the major version. There is no hard rule when the major version needs +an increment. It mostly is a soft factor, when the developers and/or +the community think there has been sufficient change to justify that. +Major version increments are expected to happen quite infrequently, +maybe around once a year. A major version increment has important +implications from the support side: without support contracts, the +current major version's last stable release and the last stable release +of the version immediately below it are supported (Adiscon, the rsyslog +sponsor, offers <a href="professional_support.html">support contracts</a> covering all other versions).</p> +<p>The <span style="font-weight: bold;">minor</span> version is +incremented whenever a non-trivial new feature is planned to be added. +Triviality of a feature is simply determined by time estimated to +implement a feature. If that's more than a few days, it is considered a +non-trivial feature. Whenever a new minor version is begun, the desired +feature is identified and will be the primary focus of that major.minor +version. Trivial features may justify a new minor version if they +either do not look trivial from the user's point of view or change +something quite considerable (so we need to alert users). A minor +version increment may also be done for some other good reasons that the +developers have.</p> +<p>The <span style="font-weight: bold;">patchlevel</span> is incremented whenever there is a bugfix or very minor feature added to a (stable or development) release.</p><p>The <span style="font-weight: bold;">devstate</span> +is important during development of a feature. It helps the developers +to release versions with new features to the general public and in the +hope that this will result in some testing. To understand how it works, +we need to look at the release cycle: As already said, at the start of +a new minor version, a new non-trivial feature to be implemented in +that version is selected. Development on this feature begins. At the +current pace of development, getting initial support for such a +non-trivial feature typically takes between two and four weeks. During +this time, new feature requests come in. Also, we may find out that it +may be just the right time to implement some not yet targeted feature +requests. A reason for this is that the minor release's feature focus +is easier to implement if the other feature is implemented first. This +is a quite common thing to happen. So development on the primary focus +may hold for a short period while we implement something else. Even +unrelated, but very trivial feature requests (maybe an hour's worth of +time to implement), may be done in between. Once we have implemented +these things, we would like to release as quickly as possible (even +more if someone has asked for the feature). So we do not like to wait +for the original focus feature to be ready (what could take maybe three +more weeks). As a result, we release the new features. But that version +will also include partial code of the focus feature. Typically this +doesn't hurt as long as noone tries to use it (what of course would +miserably fail). But still, part of the new code is already in it. When +we release such a "minor-feature enhanced" but "focus-feature not yet +completed" version, we need a way to flag it. In current thinking, that +is using a "<span style="font-weight: bold;">-mf<version></span>" <span style="font-weight: bold;">devstate</span> +in the version number ("mf" stands for "minor feature"). Version +numbers for -mf releases start at 0 for the first release and are +monotonically incremented. Once the focus feature has been fully +implemented, a new version now actually supporting that feature will be +released. Now, the release reason is changed to the well-know "<span style="font-weight: bold;">-rc<version></span>" +where "rc" stands for release candidate. For the first release +candidate, the version starts at 0 again and is incremented +monotonically for each subsequent release. Please note that a -rc0 may +only have bare functionality but later -rc's have a richer one. If new +minor features are implemented and released once we have reached rc +stage, still a new rc version is issued. The difference between "mf" +and "rc" is simply the presence of the desired feature. No support is +provided for -mf versions once the first -rc version has been released. +And only the most current -rc version is supported.</p><p>The -rc is +removed and the version declared stable when we think it has undergone +sufficient testing and look sufficiently well. Then, it'll turn into a +stable release. Stable minor releases never receive non-trivial new +features. There may be more than one -rc releases without a stable +release present at the same time. In fact, most often we will work on +the next minor development version while the previous minor version is +still a -rc because it is not yet considered sufficiently stable.</p><p>Note: <span style="font-weight: bold;">the +absence of the -devstate part indicates that a release is stable. +Following the same logic, any release with a -devstate part is unstable.</span></p><p>A quick sample: </p><p>4.0.0 +is the stable release. We begin to implement relp, moving to +major.minor to 4.1. While we develop it, someone requests a trivial +feature, which we implement. We need to release, so we will have +4.1.0-mf0. Another new feature is requested, move to 4.1.0-mf2. A first +version of RELP is implemented: 4.1.0-rc0. A new trivial feature is +implemented: 4.1.0-rc1. Relp is being enhanced: 4.1.0-rc2. We now feel +RELP is good enough for the time being and begin to implement TLS on +plain /Tcp syslog: logical increment to 4.2. Now another new feature in +that tree: 4.2.0-mf0. Note that we now have 4.0.0 (stable) and +4.1.0-rc2 and 4.1.0-mf0 (both devel). We find a big bug in RELP coding. +Two new releases: 4.1.0-rc3, 4.2.0-mf1 (the bug fix acts like a +non-focus feature change). We release TLS: 4.2.0-rc0. Another RELP bug +fix 4.1.0-rc4, 4.2.0-rc1. After a while, RELP is matured: 4.1.0 +(stable). Now support for 4.0.x stable ends. It, however, is still +provided for 3.x.x (in the actual case 2.x.x, because v3 was under the +old naming scheme and now stable v3 was ever released).</p><p style="font-weight: bold;">This is how it is done so far:</p><p>This document briefly outlines the strategy for naming +versions. It applies to versions 1.0.0 and above. Versions below that +are all unstable and have a different naming schema.</p> +<p><b>Please note that version naming is currently being +changed. There is a +<a href="http://rgerhards.blogspot.com/2007/08/on-rsyslog-versions.html">blog post about future rsyslog versions</a>.</b></p> -<p>The major version is incremented whenever a considerate, major features have -been added. This is expected to happen quite infrequently.</p> -<p>The minor version number is incremented whenever there is "sufficient need" -(at the discretion of the developers). There is a notable difference between -stable and unstable branches. The <b>stable branch</b> always has a minor -version number in the range from 0 to 9. It is expected that the stable branch -will receive bug and security fixes only. So the range of minor version numbers -should be quite sufficient.</p> -<p>For the <b>unstable branch</b>, minor version numbers always start at 10 and -are incremented as needed (again, at the discretion of the developers). Here, -new minor versions include both fixes as well as new features (hopefully most of -the time). They are expected to be released quite often.</p> -<p>The patch level (third number) is incremented whenever a really minor thing -must be added to an existing version. This is expected to happen quite -infrequently.</p> -<p>In general, the unstable branch carries all new development. Once it -concludes with a sufficiently-enhanced, quite stable version, a new major stable -version is assigned.</p> - -</body> -</html> +<p>The major version is incremented whenever a considerate, major +features have been added. This is expected to happen quite infrequently.</p> +<p>The minor version number is incremented whenever there is +"sufficient need" (at the discretion of the developers). There is a +notable difference between stable and unstable branches. The <b>stable +branch</b> always has a minor version number in the range from 0 +to 9. It is expected that the stable branch will receive bug and +security fixes only. So the range of minor version numbers should be +quite sufficient.</p> +<p>For the <b>unstable branch</b>, minor version +numbers always start at 10 and are incremented as needed (again, at the +discretion of the developers). Here, new minor versions include both +fixes as well as new features (hopefully most of the time). They are +expected to be released quite often.</p> +<p>The patch level (third number) is incremented whenever a +really minor thing must be added to an existing version. This is +expected to happen quite infrequently.</p> +<p>In general, the unstable branch carries all new development. +Once it concludes with a sufficiently-enhanced, quite stable version, a +new major stable version is assigned.</p> +</body></html>
\ No newline at end of file |