openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David P Grove" <gro...@us.ibm.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION]: Proposing to use 1.12.0 as the version for all runtimes for the first-time release under Apache
Date Mon, 27 Aug 2018 17:29:51 GMT


"Vincent S Hou" <shou@us.ibm.com> wrote on 08/27/2018 12:39:01 PM:
>
> For convenience of release management in Apache.
> * We can send one or two vote email(s) instead of 6.

I realize that it will make the initial release more convenient.  I don't
think this is a compelling reason however.

> * The download page of openwhisk.org can allocate one section to
> offer the download links of runtimes.


I don't think this is a good pattern.  I predict we will be releasing
runtimes in individual cadences, driven by changes in the upstream base
language runtime, CVEs that need to be fixed via a new runtime release,
etc.  So I think the download for the runtime needs to be organized by
runtime, then by version within each runtime, not by openwhisk version.

--dave

>
>
>
> 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
>
> -----Rodric Rabbah <rodric@gmail.com> wrote: -----
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> From: Rodric Rabbah <rodric@gmail.com>
> Date: 08/27/2018 11:45AM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION]: Proposing to use 1.12.0 as the version
> for all runtimes for the first-time release under Apache
>
> Why do they all need to start from the same version?
>
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Vincent S Hou <shou@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi OpenWhiskers,
> >
> > We are on our way to release OpenWhisk runtimes under Apache for the
first
> > time. As you may notice or not, each individual runtime repository has
> > already used
> > its own version numbers as the build tag for quite a while. In order
not
> > to disrupt the current versioning number and also accommodating the
release
> > work under Apache, I would like to propose 1.12.0 as the version number
for
> > the first time we release the six runtimes under Apache, because this
> > version number is the minimum
> > nominator I find for all the runtimes so far.
> >
> > We now have following runtimes, which have already released with their
> > version numbers:
> > docker skeleton v1.3.3
> > python2 v1.0.3
> > python3 v.1.0.3
> > node8 v1.12.0
> > node6 v1.12.0
> > php7.2 v1.0.2
> > swift4.1 v1.0.8
> > java8 v1.1.2
> >
> > I think 1.12.0 can match them all, and then use it as a common ground
to
> > move on with further version numbers. I would like to hear your
comments.
> > If no objection is heard, I will move on with 1.12.0 for the runtimes
to
> > be released under Apache for the first time.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Vincent Hou
> >
> >
> >
>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message