VERSIONING 8.0 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155
  1. APACHE 2.x VERSIONING
  2. =====================
  3. [$LastChangedDate: 2005-10-17 17:17:21 +0000 (Mon, 17 Oct 2005) $]
  4. INTRODUCTION
  5. ------------
  6. The Apache HTTP Server project must balance two competing and disjoint
  7. objectives: maintain stable code for third party authors, distributors and
  8. most importantly users so that bug and security fixes can be quickly adopted
  9. without significant hardship due to user-visible changes; and continue the
  10. development process that requires ongoing redesign to correct earlier
  11. oversights and to add additional features.
  12. The Apache HTTP Server, through version 2.0, used the Module Magic Number (MMN)
  13. to reflect API changes. This had the shortcoming of often leaving users
  14. hunting to replace binary third party modules that were now incompatible.
  15. This also left module authors searching through the API change histories to
  16. determine the exact cause for the MMN change and whether their module was
  17. affected.
  18. With the simultaneous release of Apache 2.2-stable and Apache 2.3-development,
  19. the Apache HTTP Server project is moving towards a more predictable stable
  20. release cycle, while allowing forward progress to occur without concern
  21. for breaking the stable branch. This document explains the rationale between
  22. the two versions and their behavior.
  23. STABLE RELEASES, 2.{even}.{revision}
  24. ------------------------------------
  25. All even numbered releases will be considered stable revisions.
  26. Stable revisions will retain forward compatiblity to the maximum
  27. possible extent. Features may be added during minor revisions, and
  28. features may be deprecated by making appropriate notations in the
  29. documentation, but no features may be removed.
  30. In essence, that implies that you can upgrade from one minor revision
  31. to the next with a minimum of trouble. In particular, this means:
  32. * The Module API will retain forward compatibility.
  33. It will not be necessary to update modules to work with new
  34. revisions of the stable tree.
  35. * The run-time configuration will be forward compatible.
  36. No configuration changes will be necessary to work with new
  37. revisions of the stable tree.
  38. * Compile-time configuration will be forward compatible.
  39. The configure command line options that work in one release
  40. of the stable tree will also work in the next release.
  41. As always, it will be necessary to test any new release to assure
  42. that it works correctly with a particular configuration and a
  43. particular set of modules, but every effort will be made to assure
  44. that upgrades are as smooth as possible.
  45. In addition, the following development restrictions will aid in
  46. keeping the stable tree as safe as possible:
  47. * No 'Experimental' modules; while it may be possible (based on API changes
  48. required to support a given module) to load a 2.3-development module into
  49. a 2.2-stable build of Apache, there are no guarantees. Experimental
  50. modules will be introduced to the 2.3-development versions and either
  51. added to 2.2-stable once they are proven and compatible, or deferred
  52. to the 2.4-stable release if they cannot be incorporated in the current
  53. stable release due to API change requirements.
  54. * The stable subversion tree should not remain unstable at any time. Atomic
  55. commits aught be used to introduce code from the development version to the
  56. stable tree. At any given time a security release may be in preparation,
  57. unbeknownst to other contributors. At any given time, testers may be
  58. checking out SVN trunk to confirm that a bug has been corrected. And as
  59. all code was well-tested in development prior to committing to the stable
  60. tree, there is really no reason for this tree to be broken for more than
  61. a few minutes during a lengthy commit.
  62. In order to avoid 'skipped' release numbers in the stable releases, the
  63. Release Manager will generally roll a release candidate (APACHE_#_#_#_RC#)
  64. tag. Release Candidate tarballs will be announced to the
  65. stable-testers@httpd.apache.org for the stable tree. Then, the participants
  66. will vote on the quality of the proposed release tarball.
  67. The final APACHE_#_#_# tag will not exist until the APACHE_#_#_#_RC# candidate
  68. has passed the usual votes to release that version. Only then is the final
  69. tarball packaged, removing all -rc# designations from the version number, and
  70. tagging the tree with the release number.
  71. DEVELOPMENT RELEASES, 2.{odd}.{revision}
  72. -----------------------------------------
  73. All odd numbered releases designate the 'next' possible stable release,
  74. therefore the current development version will always be one greater than
  75. the current stable release. Work proceeds on development releases, permitting
  76. the modification of the MMN at any time in order to correct deficiencies
  77. or shortcomings in the API. This means that modules from one development
  78. release to another may not be binary compatible, or may not successfully
  79. compile without modification to accomodate the API changes.
  80. The only 'supported' development release at any time will be the most
  81. recently released version. Developers will not be answering bug reports
  82. of older development releases once a new release is available. It becomes
  83. the resposibility of the reporter to use the latest development version
  84. to confirm that any issue still exists.
  85. Any new code, new API features or new ('experimental') modules may be
  86. promoted at any time to the next stable release, by a vote of the project
  87. contributors. This vote is based on the technical stability of the new
  88. code and the stability of the interface. Once moved to stable, that feature
  89. cannot change for the remainder of that stable release cycle, so the vote must
  90. reflect that the final decisions on the behavior and naming of that new
  91. feature were reached. Vetos continue to apply to this choice of introducing
  92. the new work to the stable version.
  93. At any given time, when the quality of changes to the development branch
  94. is considered release quality, that version may become a candidate for the
  95. next stable release. This includes some or all of the API changes, promoting
  96. experimental modules to stable or deprecating and eliminating older modules
  97. from the last stable release. All of these choices are considered by the
  98. project as a group in the interests of promoting the stable release, so that
  99. any given change may be 'deferred' for a future release by the group, rather
  100. than introduce unacceptable risks to adopting the next stable release.
  101. Third party module authors are strongly encouraged to test with the latest
  102. development version. This assures that the module will be ready for the next
  103. stable release, but more importantly, the author can react to shortcomings
  104. in the API early enough to warn the dev@httpd.apache.org community of the
  105. shortcomings so that they can be addressed before the stable release. The
  106. entire burden is on the module author to anticipate the needs of their module
  107. before the stable release is created. Once a new stable release cycle has
  108. begun, that API will be present for the lifetime of the stable release. Any
  109. desired changes in the stable versions must wait for inclusion into the next
  110. release cycle.
  111. When deciding to promote a development tree to being stable, a determination
  112. should be made whether the changes since the last stable version warrant a
  113. major version bump. That is, if 2.2 is the current stable version and 2.3 is
  114. 'ready' to become stable, the group needs to decide if the next stable
  115. version is 2.4 or 3.0. One suggested rule of thumb is that if it requires
  116. too much effort to port a module from 2.2 to 2.4, then the stable version
  117. should be labeled 3.0.
  118. In order to ease the burden of creating development releases, the process
  119. for packaging a development releases is less formal than for the stable
  120. release. This strategy reflects the fact that while in development, versions
  121. are cheap. Development releases may be classified as alpha, beta, or GA
  122. to reflect the group's perceived stability of the tree. Development releases
  123. may be made at any time by any committer.
  124. Please read the following link for a more detailed description of the
  125. development release strategy:
  126. http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html