ambari-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nate Cole <nc...@hortonworks.com>
Subject Re: Ambari trunk Snapshot Versioning
Date Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:41:46 GMT
I agree that #2 is a good option.  Version parsing is used in various places, so I think we
should still use a number.  It also makes it clearer to consumers of the spi to know where
to pull in dependencies.

-Nate

On 10/17/18, 4:10 PM, "Jonathan Hurley" <jhurley@hortonworks.com> wrote:

    It looks like Ambari’s trunk pom.xml has not been updated with a proper version in at
least 4 years. It currently still lists trunk as 2.0.0.0-SNAPSHOT:
    https://github.com/apache/ambari/blob/trunk/pom.xml#L24
    
    This poses several problems as we try to make our artifacts more 3rd-party friendly since
it becomes ambiguous what other maven projects are actually depending on. I think that we
need to change our process to keep this version updated with every release of Ambari. Other
Apache projects seem to do this (I took a look at Nifi, Hive, Storm, etc) and in each case,
their trunk pom.xml was at least a minor version ahead of their most recent release branch.
    
    I see three avenues for us here:
    
      1.  We can make trunk the next “known” version of Ambari. This gives us relatively
fine grain control over snapshot artifact versioning, but also opens us up to problems when
surprise versions show up. For example, up until a few weeks ago, trunk would have been 3.0.0.0-SNAPSHOT,
however now that we have a 2.8 release off of trunk, we’d need to change this to 2.8.0.0-SNAPSHOT.
      2.  We can make trunk the next major version, so that it would currently be 3.0.0.0-SNAPSHOT.
After 3.0 is released, then it would move to 4.0.0.0-SNAPSHOT even though we know that there
are interim minor releases coming out (like 3.1, 3.2, etc)
      3.  We can abandon numbering for trunk and use something like TRUNK-SNAPSHOT. This also
poses some ambiguity problems since you actually don’t know from which point in time the
snapshot is really from. There’s also a problem with our regex parsing of the version if
we switch away from the 4-digit scheme we have now.
    
    I’d like to get some opinions on this topic. I personally think that #2 makes the most
sense.
    

Mime
View raw message