[torquedev] New job_must_report pbs_server feature
knielson at clusterresources.com
Fri May 8 09:09:42 MDT 2009
Glen Beane wrote:
>I agree 100%. I would like to see "incompatible" or major changes
>going into the major version releases, minor changes going into the
>minor releases (additional features that do not alter default behavior
>and have a minimal chance of introducing bugs), and then the final
>digit in the version number would be for bug fixes only. Right now
>it is like the major version number is ignored, the minor version
>number has become the major version number, and the bug fix number is
>a combination of bug fix/minor version
Since 2006 it looks like we get a “minor” revision after a little more than a year. In line with what Glen has suggested I believe we should save “incompatible” or major changes for major releases and give time to plan and implement those changes. Minor releases such as 2.4 are not the place for major changes.
Josh Butikofer wrote:
>Yes, we've decided that some features, if they do not change default behavior
>and are only activated via explicit configuration, can be added into stable
>branches (for the time being, this means 2.3.x). The reason for this is some
>users/customers need a stable branch, but also require added enhancements
>without making the leap or waiting for the release of 2.4.
Because of this need I would suggest we pick up the pace for bug fix releases and minor releases. We have had supposedly 6 bug fix releases for 2.3. But in reality it has several new features that have been added which should merit a minor release. I think we could better mirror the actual changes in torque by posting bug fix changes more frequently. And as compatible features are added we should increment the minor release number. If we use that philosophy we can then look at a directory of releases and see where bug fixes have been made and where minor feature changes have been added.
More information about the torquedev