On 8 June 2015 at 10:45, Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> wrote:
> >> You'll also note that according to PEP 440, (as Jeremy pointed out) .postN >> is meant for non-code changes. If we want to be pedantic about the version >> numbers generated by PBR (at the gate, in tox, etc.), it should be <next >> version number>.devN but that's shaving an entirely different yak, and one >> that I don't think is especially concerning or a serious problem. > > Its a very concerning problem for continuous deployers, and thats why > pbr 0.11 is now the minimum in global requirements, because we solved > it. It can cause gate issues with dependencies not upgrading for > instance (or running the latest beta rather than the local tree meant > to be tested) [even with latest pip]. I missed the reference - sorry - http://docs.openstack.org/developer/pbr/#version - documents the algorithm pbr uses to generate versions. The reference to git sha's is incorrect, I'll push up a doc fix for that shortly (we store that in a pbr metadata file in the sdist and can report on that via the pbr CLI, but its not in the version string anymore. -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hp.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
