On 1 August 2015 at 05:16, Lucas Alvares Gomes <lucasago...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > > It sounds like we all agree -- the client we ship should default to a > fixed, > > older version. Anyone who wants newer functionality can pass a newer > version > > to their client. > > > > Here's the current state of things: > > > > server: > > - stable/kilo: 1.6 > > - current: 1.11 > > > > client: > > - stable/kilo: 1.6 > > - latest release (0.7.0): 1.6 > > - current: 1.9 > > > > So -- since we haven't released a client that sends a header > 1.6, I > > propose that we set the client back to sending the 1.6 header right away. > > While having the client default to 1.1 would be ideal, this should still > > keep the "Jackson the Absent" of the world as happy as reasonably > possible > > moving forward without breaking anyone that is packaging Kilo already. > > > > (yes, this may affect Olivia the Contributor, but that's OK because > Olivia > > will have read this email :) ) > > > > There are no backwards incompatible changes from 1.6 to 1.9, so I > suggest we just leave it at 1.9 and don't break "Jackson" nor "Olivia" > (and have no assumptions about who will read this or not). > > Hi, I'd like to make sure I understand. Is it the case that ideally, if we could go back in time, we'd like to change the client so it defaults to 1.1? But since we can't, the next client that we ship/release will have the most reasonable oldest version? If so, then since the most recent client shipped is at 1.6, then I think we should put it back to 1.6 even though it is 1.9 on master. Regardless of whether there are no backwards incompatible changes between 1.6 & 1.9 -- because we need to stick to some way-of-doing-things, and if we use 1.9, I suspect it will be confusing. At least 1.6 was what we had at the end of kilo. What we're saying is that for M*, N*, O*, ..., the version used in the client will be the higher of server's MIN_VER_STR or 1.6, right? > ... > > Apart from that I think most of the people agreed on the client > defaulting to the minimal version (which I'm assuming means 1.1). So > what people think? Should we add some warning messages when the > version is not specified in the CLI saying we are moving it back to > 1.1 on the next releases? And then default it to 1.1 later? > > Cheers, > Lucas > > Hey Lucas, Maybe I missed something about the client. If no version is specified to the (next-released) client, won't it use 1.6? How are we going to move it back to 1.1? --ruby
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
