On 06/08/2015 06:10 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2015-06-08 16:53:21 +0100 (+0100), Dave Walker wrote: >> This breaks the desire of wanting to have a shared version scheme if >> consumers add their own local patches via git. This works fine for >> consumers that do not use git for handling their local patches, but >> does not support the model of allowing the user to rebase using git. >> >> Perhaps tags ARE superior for this? > > Agreed, even the .devN (or earlier .postN) versioning has the same > issue. If you rely on PBR autoversioning for non-tagged commits then > your local commits _will_ conflict with upstream autoversions.
The problem is that we use the 2 first numbers as major version. If instead of: 2015.1.N we switch to something like: 20151.X.Y then we restore sanity and a real semver system. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo) __________________________________________________________________________ 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
