diff options
Diffstat (limited to '')
| -rw-r--r-- | source/proposals/version_naming.rst | 150 |
1 files changed, 150 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/source/proposals/version_naming.rst b/source/proposals/version_naming.rst new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7a0e7f2 --- /dev/null +++ b/source/proposals/version_naming.rst @@ -0,0 +1,150 @@ +Version Naming +============== + +This is the proposal on how versions should be named in the future: + +Rsyslog version naming has undergone a number of changes in the past. +Our sincere hopes is that the scheme outlined here will serve us well +for the future. In general, a three-number versioning scheme with a +potential development state indication is used. It follows this pattern: + +major.minor.patchlevel[-devstate] + +where devstate has some further structure: +-<releaseReason><releaseNumber> + +All stable builds come without the devstate part. All unstable +development version come with it. + +The major version is incremented whenever something really important +happens. A single new feature, even if important, does not justify an +increase in the major version. There is no hard rule when the major +version needs an increment. It mostly is a soft factor, when the +developers and/or the community think there has been sufficient change +to justify that. Major version increments are expected to happen quite +infrequently, maybe around once a year. A major version increment has +important implications from the support side: without support contracts, +the current major version's last stable release and the last stable +release of the version immediately below it are supported (Adiscon, the +rsyslog sponsor, offers `support contracts <http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/>`_ +covering all other versions). + +The minor version is incremented whenever a non-trivial new feature is +planned to be added. Triviality of a feature is simply determined by +time estimated to implement a feature. If that's more than a few days, +it is considered a non-trivial feature. Whenever a new minor version is +begun, the desired feature is identified and will be the primary focus +of that major.minor version. Trivial features may justify a new minor +version if they either do not look trivial from the user's point of view +or change something quite considerable (so we need to alert users). A +minor version increment may also be done for some other good reasons +that the developers have. + +The patchlevel is incremented whenever there is a bugfix or very minor +feature added to a (stable or development) release. + +The devstate is important during development of a feature. It helps the +developers to release versions with new features to the general public +and in the hope that this will result in some testing. To understand how +it works, we need to look at the release cycle: As already said, at the +start of a new minor version, a new non-trivial feature to be +implemented in that version is selected. Development on this feature +begins. At the current pace of development, getting initial support for +such a non-trivial feature typically takes between two and four weeks. +During this time, new feature requests come in. Also, we may find out +that it may be just the right time to implement some not yet targeted +feature requests. A reason for this is that the minor release's feature +focus is easier to implement if the other feature is implemented first. +This is a quite common thing to happen. So development on the primary +focus may hold for a short period while we implement something else. +Even unrelated, but very trivial feature requests (maybe an hour's worth +of time to implement), may be done in between. Once we have implemented +these things, we would like to release as quickly as possible (even more +if someone has asked for the feature). So we do not like to wait for the +original focus feature to be ready (what could take maybe three more +weeks). As a result, we release the new features. But that version will +also include partial code of the focus feature. Typically this doesn't +hurt as long as noone tries to use it (what of course would miserably +fail). But still, part of the new code is already in it. When we release +such a "minor-feature enhanced" but "focus-feature not yet completed" +version, we need a way to flag it. In current thinking, that is using a +"-mf<version>" devstate in the version number ("mf" stands for "minor +feature"). Version numbers for -mf releases start at 0 for the first +release and are monotonically incremented. Once the focus feature has +been fully implemented, a new version now actually supporting that +feature will be released. Now, the release reason is changed to the +well-know "-rc<version>" where "rc" stands for release candidate. For +the first release candidate, the version starts at 0 again and is +incremented monotonically for each subsequent release. Please note that +a -rc0 may only have bare functionality but later -rc's have a richer +one. If new minor features are implemented and released once we have +reached rc stage, still a new rc version is issued. The difference +between "mf" and "rc" is simply the presence of the desired feature. No +support is provided for -mf versions once the first -rc version has been +released. And only the most current -rc version is supported. + +The -rc is removed and the version declared stable when we think it has +undergone sufficient testing and look sufficiently well. Then, it'll +turn into a stable release. Stable minor releases never receive +non-trivial new features. There may be more than one -rc releases +without a stable release present at the same time. In fact, most often +we will work on the next minor development version while the previous +minor version is still a -rc because it is not yet considered +sufficiently stable. + +Note: the absence of the -devstate part indicates that a release is +stable. Following the same logic, any release with a -devstate part is +unstable. + +A quick sample: + +4.0.0 is the stable release. We begin to implement relp, moving to +major.minor to 4.1. While we develop it, someone requests a trivial +feature, which we implement. We need to release, so we will have +4.1.0-mf0. Another new feature is requested, move to 4.1.0-mf2. A first +version of RELP is implemented: 4.1.0-rc0. A new trivial feature is +implemented: 4.1.0-rc1. Relp is being enhanced: 4.1.0-rc2. We now feel +RELP is good enough for the time being and begin to implement TLS on +plain /Tcp syslog: logical increment to 4.2. Now another new feature in +that tree: 4.2.0-mf0. Note that we now have 4.0.0 (stable) and 4.1.0-rc2 +and 4.1.0-mf0 (both devel). We find a big bug in RELP coding. Two new +releases: 4.1.0-rc3, 4.2.0-mf1 (the bug fix acts like a non-focus +feature change). We release TLS: 4.2.0-rc0. Another RELP bug fix +4.1.0-rc4, 4.2.0-rc1. After a while, RELP is matured: 4.1.0 (stable). +Now support for 4.0.x stable ends. It, however, is still provided for +3.x.x (in the actual case 2.x.x, because v3 was under the old naming +scheme and now stable v3 was ever released). + +This is how it is done so far: + +This document briefly outlines the strategy for naming versions. It +applies to versions 1.0.0 and above. Versions below that are all +unstable and have a different naming schema. + +**Please note that version naming is currently being changed. There is a +`blog post about future rsyslog +versions <https://rainer.gerhards.net/2007/08/on-rsyslog-versions.html>`_.** + +The major version is incremented whenever a considerate, major features +have been added. This is expected to happen quite infrequently. + +The minor version number is incremented whenever there is "sufficient +need" (at the discretion of the developers). There is a notable +difference between stable and unstable branches. The **stable branch** +always has a minor version number in the range from 0 to 9. It is +expected that the stable branch will receive bug and security fixes +only. So the range of minor version numbers should be quite sufficient. + +For the **unstable branch**, minor version numbers always start at 10 +and are incremented as needed (again, at the discretion of the +developers). Here, new minor versions include both fixes as well as new +features (hopefully most of the time). They are expected to be released +quite often. + +The patch level (third number) is incremented whenever a really minor +thing must be added to an existing version. This is expected to happen +quite infrequently. + +In general, the unstable branch carries all new development. Once it +concludes with a sufficiently-enhanced, quite stable version, a new +major stable version is assigned. |