Semver instead of revisions for charms?

[Marco Ceppi]

There is no plan at this time to move to anything other than revision
numbers for charm. The idea behind the system is there should really
/never/ be any backwards compatible breaks. If you find yourself running
into a situation, make use of the upgrade-charm hook to update/rewrite any
internal data structures you're using to the new version.

This way charms are always forward looking and up-gradable as such. While
I'm a huge fan of semver, adding that as a primitive for charms means there
may be chances where a user of a charm won't be able to upgrade. That's a
precedence we don't want to set.

Marco

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 7:36 AM Patrik Karisch <patrik.karisch at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> is there any plan to implement semantic versioning for charms and step
> away from revisions which can't indicate major BC breaks compared to a
> major release with semver?
>
> Cheerz
> Patrik
> --
> Juju mailing list
> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20160228/eba576c5/attachment.html>