On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 05:54:40PM +, Joe Clarke (jclarke) wrote:
> > - I prefer to have non-backwards compatible changes marked and
> > explained in the modules instead of relying on some schema
> > comparison algorithm.
> >
> > [JMC] IMHO, the algorithm is useful in addition to any
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 05:31:26PM +, Jason Sterne (Nokia) wrote:
> Its too late. The industry is already ignoring parts of 7950 in cases where
> many people agree that is the most practical thing to do.
>
> This work gives a common format for an author to explicitly indicate “hey –
> look
> As for the discussion on YANG artifact “equivalence” I recall we discussed
> this a bit in meetings and amongst the authors. I don’t remember all the
> points but it boiled down to when the revision changes, the revision-label
> changes. So if, for example, a module is extracted or produced
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 10:31 AM Jason Sterne (Nokia) <
jason.ste...@nokia.com> wrote:
> Its too late. The industry is already ignoring parts of 7950 in cases
> where many people agree that is the most practical thing to do.
>
>
>
> This work gives a common format for an author to explicitly
Its too late. The industry is already ignoring parts of 7950 in cases where
many people agree that is the most practical thing to do.
This work gives a common format for an author to explicitly indicate “hey –
look out, we made an NBC change – take a look and see how it impacts you”.
Jason
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 8:48 AM Jason Sterne (Nokia)
wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
>
>
> From my read of 7950, adding a mandatory leaf to a grouping isn’t allowed.
> Section 11 lists every case of allowable changes. Can you point out what
> statement(s) you feel allow it?
>
The "grouping"
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 9:00 AM Jason Sterne (Nokia)
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I don’t think requiring a new YANG 1.2 (or 2.0) is a practical way to
> introduce this much-needed enhancement to YANG (indicating NBC changes and
> clearly alerting users of YANG modules to the fact that there is an
Hi Martin,
> -Original Message-
> From: netmod On Behalf Of Martin Björklund
> Sent: 07 June 2023 08:22
> To: rwilton=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Joint WGLC on "semver" and "module-versioning" drafts
>
> Hi,
>
> But the two drafts go way
Hi all,
I don’t think requiring a new YANG 1.2 (or 2.0) is a practical way to introduce
this much-needed enhancement to YANG (indicating NBC changes and clearly
alerting users of YANG modules to the fact that there is an NBC change). NBC
changes are happening (IETF, vendors, other standard
Hi Andy,
From my read of 7950, adding a mandatory leaf to a grouping isn’t allowed.
Section 11 lists every case of allowable changes. Can you point out what
statement(s) you feel allow it?
If there is some ambiguity about that in RFC7950 personally I think any
clarification would be to make
Dne 13. 06. 23 v 17:07 Robert Varga napsal(a):
On 05/06/2023 11.46, Martin Björklund wrote:
- introduce new instance-identifier data type based on RFC 7951
definition
- introduce new identityref data type based on RFC 7951 definition
... but I do agree with these!
I am not sure I
On 05/06/2023 11.46, Martin Björklund wrote:
- introduce new instance-identifier data type based on RFC 7951 definition
- introduce new identityref data type based on RFC 7951 definition
... but I do agree with these!
I am not sure I follow... is this about providing
12 matches
Mail list logo
