How many NAS kann radius take?

[John Dennis]

On 02/13/2014 10:51 AM, A.L.M.Buxey at lboro.ac.uk wrote:
>> NAK to removing them in 3.1, you shouldn't remove features in a minor
>> point release. I would suggest postponing such a change to the next
>> major release, 4.0.
> 
> 3.0 - 3.1 isnt a minor point release - major changes between the 2.
> 
> 3.0.1 - 3.0.2 is a minor point release
> 
> (I'll cite the openssl 0.9.x -> 0.9.y patch as previous precendent  ;-) )

Sigh, everyone uses different terminology [1] and the mistakes committed
by other projects do not provide justification.

Here's the short story:

Red Hat policy is incompatible configuration changes can only occur when
a package major version changes. We do not permit package major version
changes to occur in any given distribution (e.g. RHEL-6, RHEL-7, Fedora
19, etc.) otherwise applying a distribution update could break an
otherwise properly running system by introducing incompatible
configuration, especially because updates are frequently applied
automatically. This is a sane release engineering policy.

Applying a package update must never break a system. Migration to a new
distribution is the moment at which admins are on alert for significant
changes they must pro-actively react to.

[1] The terminology we use and I'm familiar with is [2]:

Numbers are separated by dots.

Major is first number.
Minor is second number.
Bug fix is third number.

So in my world 3.0 -> 3.1 is a minor version change, the major number is
the same but the minor number has been incremented (thus you cannot
delete functionality [3]).

[2] These are how upstream versions are interpreted. RPM nvr's
(name-version-release) is something else, where the v for version is
identically the upstream version and the r for release is a distribution
specific increment usually used for distribution specific patches to
upstream or rebuilds.

[3] Adding functionality in a configuration compatible manner is
permissible.
-- 
John