Akihiro Motoki <amot...@gmail.com> wrote:
What releases should we support in API references?
There are several options.
1. The latest stable release + master
2. All supported stable releases + master
3. more older releases too?
Option 2 sounds reasonable to me.
This question is raised in the neutron api-ref patch [1].
This patch drops the API reference of LBaaS v1 which was dropped in
Newton release.
At least Newton is not released yet, so I think it is better to keep
it until Newton is released.
I would like to get a community consensus before moving this patch forward.
Thanks,
Akihiro
Since neutron-lib is branched on stable/* boundary, I feel that it would be
fine to keep one-to-one relationship between neutron and neutron-lib
api-ref branches.
The only reason why keeping all stable branches described in master would
be ease of maintenance, because you don’t need to backport any api-ref
related fixes to previous branches.
So, I would not vote for any of 3 options suggested. Instead, I would keep
master api-ref documenting just the latest (master) neutron API, and keep
stable releases documented in corresponding branches whenever they differ.
Of course it will require to solve an issue of publishing api-ref for each
of supported branches instead of just master.
Ihar
__________________________________________________________________________
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
