Re: [netmod] backward compatibility requirements in draft-verdt-netmod-yang-versioning-reqs-00

2018-07-25 Thread Juergen Schoenwaelder
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 05:25:32PM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: > > > One alternative way to build a robust client would be to have an internally > defined schema by the client (perhaps based on open models, or perhaps a > particular version of vendor models, possibly with some deviations, or

Re: [netmod] backward compatibility requirements in draft-verdt-netmod-yang-versioning-reqs-00

2018-07-25 Thread Robert Wilton
On 25/07/2018 12:03, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 04:32:05PM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: But if fixing a definition requires a whole new module name then I think that causes lots of problems (e.g. consider needing to change ief-interfaces to ietf-interfaces-v2 because

Re: [netmod] backward compatibility requirements in draft-verdt-netmod-yang-versioning-reqs-00

2018-07-25 Thread Juergen Schoenwaelder
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 04:32:05PM +0100, Robert Wilton wrote: > > But if fixing a definition requires a whole new module name then I think > that causes lots of problems (e.g. consider needing to change ief-interfaces > to ietf-interfaces-v2 because of changing one random leaf). I assume this