openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Allen <...@akrabat.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION]: Proposing to use 1.12.0 as the version for all runtimes for the first-time release under Apache
Date Tue, 28 Aug 2018 22:01:07 GMT
Hi,

How will this work when we need to do new releases of one runtime and not another?

E.g. PHP 7.3 is due soon and so I’ll be updating the PHP runtime for this. Assuming semantic
versioning, we’ll need 1.13.0 for openwhisk-runtime-php as it’s a new feature, not a bug
fix. Will all the other runtimes and OpenWhisk itself need to be released as 1.13.0 because
the PHP 7.3 runtime was added to openwhisk-runtime-php?

i.e. I don’t understand how the versioning of runtimes will work so that users know that
a given runtime works with a given rest-of-OpenWhisk.

Regards,

Rob

> On 28 Aug 2018, at 22:55, Vincent S Hou <shou@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> Good. I am totally support getting rid of the old tagging system and embrace the way
in Apache, and move on the future releases with it.
> 1.12.0 is the latest version for the old system across runtimes, and the earliest start
for the new Apache version.
> To me, it is a perfect pick.
> 
> In future, we should stop releasing multiple tags for different kinds in one repository.
For example, nodejs 6 and nodejs 8, we should try to keep them
> under the same versioning number. As long as code is in the same repo, it should stick
to the same version. If it is not obeyed, we have to revive the old tagging system, we are
using now.
> 
> Best wishes.
> Vincent Hou (侯胜博)
> 
> Advisory Software Engineer, OpenWhisk Contributor, Open Technology, IBM Cloud
> 
> Notes ID: Vincent S Hou/Raleigh/IBM, E-mail: shou@us.ibm.com,
> Phone: +1(919)254-7182
> Address: 4205 S Miami Blvd (Cornwallis Drive), Durham, NC 27703, United States
> 
> -----"David P Grove" <groved@us.ibm.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: "David P Grove" <groved@us.ibm.com>
> Date: 08/28/2018 03:46PM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION]: Proposing to use 1.12.0 as the version for all runtimes for
the first-time release under Apache
> 
> "Vincent S Hou" <shou@us.ibm.com> wrote on 08/28/2018 03:14:38 PM:
>> 
>> The version number we choose for openwhisk runtimes to be released
>> under Apache as an incubator is a separate versioning system from
>> what we have already as GitHub tags. The apache version will not
>> break anything we have as legacy. The only difference it brings is
>> just a new tag.
>> 
>> If we pick up 1.12.0-incubating for all the runtimes, all the source
>> code of runtimes are packaged in the artifacts available in
>> Apache SVN server. When they are released, a new tag 1.12.0-
>> incubating is added to the GitHub, but with some variations. Take
>> nodejs for instance, we added two tags
>> 6@1.12.0-incubating and 8@1.12.0-incubating to the same commit, so
>> that nodejs 8 will push 1.12.0-incubating image to dockerhub and
>> nodejs 6 will push 1.12.0-incubating as well. It is possible that
>> the new 1.12.0-incubating nodejs 8 image equals to an existing
>> image, like 1.9.0 or latest, but that is totally acceptable.
>> The same rule applies to any other runtime repository.
>> 
>> The old GitHub tagging system can still work and develop as planned.
>> The new Apache versioning system can grow in parallel without any
>> interference. Right now, the apache version always ends with -
>> incubating because openwhisk is an incubator, so that we can clearly
>> distinguish it. In future, when we graduate, we can make sure the
>> apache version ends with -apache. All the docker images in dockerhub
>> are tagged with -incubating or -apache, without affecting the
>> existing GitHub tags we have.
>> 
>> This is why I root for using the same Apache version for all the
>> openwhisk runtimes. It does not influence anything we currently have.
>> 
>> 
> 
> Hi Vincent,
> 
>    I don't object to starting at 1.12.0 (or whatever the lowest unused
> number is across all previous tags).   Version number space is cheap, we
> can skip some to align if you really want to do it that way.  I don't think
> it is that useful, but I also don't think it is harmful.
> 
>    However, I do think we need to stop using the old system and only
> tag/release using the Apache process going forward. As pointed out in
> Bertrand's blog post [1], there are very solid reasons to do it that way.
> Assuming we do this, we will very quickly have runtimes having Apache
> releases on their own cadence and the version numbers won't align with each
> other or with openwhisk core.  I think this is fine, but I think we should
> realize now that is going to happen and not assume we will have aligned
> version numbers any time in the future (except perhaps for 2.0, 3.0. etc).
> 
> --dave
> 
> [1] https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/success-at-apache-the-apache1
> 


Mime
View raw message