[OpenAFS] Re: [OpenAFS-devel] Thinking about 1.6

Derrick Brashear shadow@gmail.com
Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:29:22 -0500

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Andrew Deason <adeason@sinenomine.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:41:47 -0800
> "Buhrmaster, Gary" <gtb@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
>> > Right, but if it is part of the initial 1.6 release, I think people
>> > will quite a bit more cautious then just replacing binaries anyway
>> > since it is a major version change then then a .x update.
>> Not all the people running openAFS will be as knowledgably
>> (even as to the numbering system of a 1.<even>) as the people
>> on this list.
>> Many (linux) packaging systems will just replace older versions
>> without a discussion with the installer about what else they
>> need to change
> I have faith in at least our resident rpm and deb packagers to give some
> notice.

For RedHat, you'd either be upgrading by hand or upgrading your yum
repo repository, e.g. "you took action to get here, it didn't just

> Also, downstream packagers can automate changing BosConfig to
> reflect a DAFS configuration, if they decide that the upgrade path
> should move to DAFS transparently.
> People that compile and install the binaries themselves ideally are a
> little more aware of what's going on (otherwise, why would they
> upgrade?). And you don't need to know about the even/odd numbering
> scheme, just that the 4 in 1.4 hasn't changed in a while.