Small feature request for v0.55 release
I see that v0.55 will be the next stable release. Would it be possible to use standard tarball naming conventions for this release? If I download http://ceph.com/download/ceph-0.48.2.tar.bz2, the top level directory is actually ceph-0.48.2argonaut, not ceph-0.48.2 as expected. Downloading http://ceph.com/download/ceph-0.48.2argonaut.tar.bz2 yields a slightly more expected result, but still isn't the typical *ix style of name-version.tar. This is very annoying in some build systems, which have that assumption. I've actually been extracting the tarballs, renaming the top level directory, then recompressing them. It would be great if we didn't have to do that with the next release, e.g. extracting http://ceph.com/download/ceph-0.55.tar.bz2 would yield a top level directory of ceph-0.55. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Small feature request for v0.55 release
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Nick Bartos wrote: > I see that v0.55 will be the next stable release. Would it be > possible to use standard tarball naming conventions for this release? > > If I download http://ceph.com/download/ceph-0.48.2.tar.bz2, the top > level directory is actually ceph-0.48.2argonaut, not ceph-0.48.2 as > expected. Downloading > http://ceph.com/download/ceph-0.48.2argonaut.tar.bz2 yields a slightly > more expected result, but still isn't the typical *ix style of > name-version.tar. This is very annoying in some build systems, which > have that assumption. I've actually been extracting the tarballs, > renaming the top level directory, then recompressing them. > > It would be great if we didn't have to do that with the next release, > e.g. extracting http://ceph.com/download/ceph-0.55.tar.bz2 would yield > a top level directory of ceph-0.55. Appending the codename to the version string is something we did with argonaut (0.48argonaut) just to make it obvious to users which stable version they are on. How do people feel about that? Is it worthwhile? Useless? Ugly? We can certainly skip it for 0.55 bobtail... sage -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Small feature request for v0.55 release
On 14 Nov 2012, at 16:14, Sage Weil wrote:
>
> Appending the codename to the version string is something we did with
> argonaut (0.48argonaut) just to make it obvious to users which stable
> version they are on.
>
> How do people feel about that? Is it worthwhile? Useless? Ugly?
>
> We can certainly skip it for 0.55 bobtail…
Just throwing in some thoughts, but how about a scheme like
${name}-stable-${version}.tar.bz2 and have the corresponding directory
structure inside and just ditch code names in the tar ball filename? It doesn't
look as nice with out a codename, but it makes it absolutely clear to new users
that it is a stable release.
Jimmy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Small feature request for v0.55 release
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Nick Bartos wrote: > I see that v0.55 will be the next stable release. Would it be > possible to use standard tarball naming conventions for this release? > > If I download http://ceph.com/download/ceph-0.48.2.tar.bz2, the top > level directory is actually ceph-0.48.2argonaut, not ceph-0.48.2 as > expected. Downloading > http://ceph.com/download/ceph-0.48.2argonaut.tar.bz2 yields a slightly > more expected result, but still isn't the typical *ix style of > name-version.tar. This is very annoying in some build systems, which > have that assumption. I've actually been extracting the tarballs, > renaming the top level directory, then recompressing them. > > It would be great if we didn't have to do that with the next release, > e.g. extracting http://ceph.com/download/ceph-0.55.tar.bz2 would yield > a top level directory of ceph-0.55. +1 I'm glad to see I'm not the only one doing this. Gentoo's ebuild system doesn't respond kindly to this either. t. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Small feature request for v0.55 release
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Jimmy Tang wrote:
>
> On 14 Nov 2012, at 16:14, Sage Weil wrote:
>
>>
>> Appending the codename to the version string is something we did with
>> argonaut (0.48argonaut) just to make it obvious to users which stable
>> version they are on.
>>
>> How do people feel about that? Is it worthwhile? Useless? Ugly?
>>
>> We can certainly skip it for 0.55 bobtail…
>
> Just throwing in some thoughts, but how about a scheme like
> ${name}-stable-${version}.tar.bz2 and have the corresponding directory
> structure inside and just ditch code names in the tar ball filename? It
> doesn't look as nice with out a codename, but it makes it absolutely clear to
> new users that it is a stable release.
>
Personally, I'd prefer standard naming of ${name}-${version}.tar.bz2.
You make it clear on your site which version is the LTS release, and
which are the developer releases.
t.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Small feature request for v0.55 release
My personal preference would be for ${name}-${version}.tar.bz2 as
well, but 2nd place would be ${name}-stable-${version}.tar.bz2.
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Tren Blackburn wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Jimmy Tang wrote:
>>
>> On 14 Nov 2012, at 16:14, Sage Weil wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Appending the codename to the version string is something we did with
>>> argonaut (0.48argonaut) just to make it obvious to users which stable
>>> version they are on.
>>>
>>> How do people feel about that? Is it worthwhile? Useless? Ugly?
>>>
>>> We can certainly skip it for 0.55 bobtail…
>>
>> Just throwing in some thoughts, but how about a scheme like
>> ${name}-stable-${version}.tar.bz2 and have the corresponding directory
>> structure inside and just ditch code names in the tar ball filename? It
>> doesn't look as nice with out a codename, but it makes it absolutely clear
>> to new users that it is a stable release.
>>
> Personally, I'd prefer standard naming of ${name}-${version}.tar.bz2.
> You make it clear on your site which version is the LTS release, and
> which are the developer releases.
>
> t.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
