Re: [MirageOS-devel] V1 vs V2 mirage-types

[Daniel BÃnzli <daniel.buenzli@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Le lundi, 17 novembre 2014 Ã 17:26, Anil Madhavapeddy a Ãcrit :

> Perhaps we should think in terms of STABLE and DEVEL, instead of V1
> and V2 (which imply a V3, V4, etc). If we just have two interfaces,
> then the class of breakages are well understood:
>  
> - A change in a STABLE interface requires an immediate rev to all the
> packages that use the old interface, or else they'll simply be
> Mirage incompatible. Old implementations will be consigned to the
> depths of constraint hell so they will not be selected with the
> latest Mirage version.
>  
> - DEVEL packages represent work in progress interfaces, and libraries
> should do their best to keep up with the interface. When we're happy
> that a certain interface is behaving well, it can be promoted to
> STABLE.

I'm not sure this scheme really answer the question; V1 FS used to be STABLE, 
it's no longer. How to you remove things from STABLE.

One question that still bugs me (due to my mirage ignorance) is can V1 FS still 
be used in mirage V2 ? If that's the case these signatures are not really 
versions, just different ways of interacting with the system (some of which may 
eventually become unsupported).

Daniel



_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel