Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RFC: 0110 framework/cli compatibility assurance #111

Merged
merged 38 commits into from
Apr 12, 2020

Conversation

iliapolo
Copy link
Contributor

@iliapolo iliapolo commented Feb 3, 2020

Rendered version

Closes #110


By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

@iliapolo iliapolo marked this pull request as ready for review February 3, 2020 12:12
Copy link
Contributor

@eladb eladb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we need to rethink our entire protocol versioning model

@iliapolo
Copy link
Contributor Author

iliapolo commented Feb 4, 2020

@eladb @RomainMuller This is ready for another review.

I think the main issues to address are:

Thanks

@iliapolo iliapolo mentioned this pull request Feb 4, 2020
6 tasks
@eladb eladb changed the title RFC: #110 Compatibility Assurance Strategy RFC: 0110 Compatibility Assurance Strategy Feb 4, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@eladb eladb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The current proposal does fully address the problem of a new framework version that requires a new CLI version as it still leaves quite a lot of potential for error by developers:

  • They can forget to write an integ test
  • The bump of the protocol version can be messed up (happened many times)

Let's take this all the way and just eliminate one direction of compatibility by requiring CLI to always be >= framework. We already push users to upgrade their CLIs and already have cases where this is required (even if users don't use a new feature), so let's just keep it dead simple.

@eladb eladb changed the title RFC: 0110 Compatibility Assurance Strategy RFC: 0110 framework/cli compatibility assurance Feb 13, 2020
@iliapolo iliapolo force-pushed the epolon/compatibility-strategy branch from 380a98a to 947ba44 Compare February 15, 2020 03:26
@iliapolo iliapolo requested review from RomainMuller, a team and eladb March 17, 2020 21:33
@iliapolo iliapolo requested review from RomainMuller and eladb March 29, 2020 09:59
@iliapolo
Copy link
Contributor Author

@eladb @RomainMuller @rix0rrr I made the adjustments according to the new schema versioning we implemented. Have a quick look?

@iliapolo iliapolo merged commit 829e121 into master Apr 12, 2020
@iliapolo iliapolo deleted the epolon/compatibility-strategy branch April 12, 2020 08:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

CLI Compatibility Strategy
4 participants