02/12/2019 16:43, Kinsella, Ray: > QQ. > > What do you plan to do then, when you go for longer periods of ABI stability?
Very good point Ray! For longer periods it would not mach DPDK version number. So we keep standard scheme of increasing by +1 every quarter? > From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 04:29:06PM +0100, David Marchand wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 3:57 PM Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Start a new release cycle with empty release notes. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > I would prefer increasing the ABI version to 20.2 for an easy > > > > mapping with code version: > > > > DPDK 19.11 = ABI 20 > > > > libs 19.11 = .so.20.0 > > > > DPDK 20.02 = ABI 20 > > > > libs 20.02 = .so.20.2 > > > > DPDK 20.05 = ABI 20 > > > > libs 20.05 = .so.20.5 > > > > DPDK 20.08 = ABI 20 > > > > libs 20.08 = .so.20.8 > > > > > > > > Opinions? > > > > > > +1 but no strong opinion. > > > > > I like that idea too, though again no strong opinion either way. >
