X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C70EA4.8623C697@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 18:10:19 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C70EA4.8623C697"
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: product version numbering
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 18:10:18 -0800
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E017B36E1@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E013D253C@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: product version numbering
thread-index: AccOnRIbXiOsgJiNT8mVBTz7VdW8vAAAvykQAABabeAAAGzilQAAUuEQ
From: "Jerry Lopatin" <jerry.lopatin@onstor.com>
To: "Paul Hammer" <paul.hammer@onstor.com>,
	"Tim Gardner" <tim.gardner@onstor.com>,
	"Sandrine Boulanger" <sandrine.boulanger@onstor.com>,
	"dl-Clio" <dl-Clio@onstor.com>,
	"dl-lambo" <dl-lambo@onstor.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C70EA4.8623C697
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Upon further review ...... the original ruling stands:
=20
Clio            2.1.0.0=20
Lambo           2.2.0.0=20
DeLorean        2.3.0.0=20
=20
For those that are interested, here are the arguments:
=20
If we believe that the level zero copy in Lambo is simply "polishing a
feature" that wasn't quite ready in Clio, it would make sense to use a
2.1.1 designation for Clio -- that's where my head was originally.
=20
However, given that Lambo will ship shortly after Clio, and much of that
time is holiday, it's likely that most users will go directly to Lambo.
And given that we have lots of numbers to use, we might as well have
them go to a release number that doesn't have a maintenance designation
-- 2.2.0 accomplishes that  (what I was thinking today)
=20
Narayan agrees with the second argument, so that's why we will go with
the 2.1 -> 2.2 -> 2.3 scheme.
=20
I also strongly agree with the comments that we should make a real
effort to reduce or eliminate product numbers from our code.  Numbers
can change frequently based on non-technical (ie market) criteria, and
we want to be able to respond.
=20
Is this OK with everyone?
=20
Jerry

________________________________

From: Paul Hammer=20
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 6:01 PM
To: Tim Gardner; Sandrine Boulanger; dl-Clio; dl-lambo
Subject: RE: product version numbering


Think we need to abstract the versioning that the CDB uses in that case.
Externally I assume that any customer will be able to upgrade directly
to Lambo from 12.x, 13.x.x and 2.x, is that still the case? Also assume
that 2.2 will be able to upgrade to any future release?

________________________________

From: Tim Gardner
Sent: Wed 11/22/2006 5:52 PM
To: Sandrine Boulanger; dl-Clio; dl-lambo
Subject: RE: product version numbering



The version number has to be known to the cluster DB upgrade code to
make decisions about how

to upgrade. Chris is at the point where she needs to know for Lambo.

Based on direction from both Jay and Jerry, we are coding Lambo to be
2.2.0.0.

Tim


_____________________________________________
From: Sandrine Boulanger
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 5:39 PM
To: Tim Gardner; dl-Clio; dl-lambo
Subject: RE: product version numbering

Which piece of code has dependency on the version? We should avoid this
as much as possible...

_____________________________________________
From: Tim Gardner
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 5:17 PM
To: dl-Clio; dl-lambo
Subject: product version numbering

There was some confusion in the dev meeting today with regard to product
version numbering.

I confirmed the following numbering scheme with Jay:

Clio            2.1.0.0

Lambo           2.2.0.0

DeLorean        2.3.0.0

This was discussed and agreed to in the first lambo project planning
meeting.

This is the numbering scheme that development is coding to.

Tim



------_=_NextPart_001_01C70EA4.8623C697
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML dir=3Dltr><HEAD><TITLE>RE: product version numbering</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Upon further review ...... the original ruling=20
stands:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2><FONT color=3D#0000ff>Clio&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2.1.0.0</FONT><FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3> =
<BR></FONT><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Lambo&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
2.2.0.0</FONT></FONT><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT face=3D"Times New =
Roman" size=3D3>=20
<BR></FONT><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>DeLorean&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
2.3.0.0</FONT><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3> </FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>For those that are interested, here are the=20
arguments:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>If we believe that the level zero copy in Lambo =
is simply=20
"polishing a feature" that wasn't quite ready in Clio, it would make =
sense to=20
use a 2.1.1 designation for Clio -- that's where my head was=20
originally.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>However, given that Lambo will ship shortly =
after Clio, and=20
much of that time is holiday, it's likely that most users will go =
directly to=20
Lambo.&nbsp; And given that we have lots of numbers to use, we might as =
well=20
have them go to a release number that doesn't have a maintenance =
designation --=20
2.2.0 accomplishes that&nbsp; (what I was thinking =
today)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Narayan agrees with the second argument, so =
that's why we=20
will go with the 2.1 -&gt; 2.2 -&gt; 2.3 scheme.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>I also&nbsp;<SPAN =
class=3D559540902-23112006>strongly=20
</SPAN>agree with the comments that we should make a real effort to =
reduce or=20
eliminate product numbers from our code.&nbsp; Numbers can change =
frequently=20
based on non-technical (ie market) criteria, and we want to be able to=20
respond.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Is this OK with everyone?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D625120202-23112006><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Jerry</FONT></SPAN></DIV></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader lang=3Den-us dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft>
<HR tabIndex=3D-1>
<FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2><B>From:</B> Paul Hammer <BR><B>Sent:</B> =
Wednesday,=20
November 22, 2006 6:01 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Tim Gardner; Sandrine Boulanger; =

dl-Clio; dl-lambo<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: product version=20
numbering<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=3DidOWAReplyText19708 dir=3Dltr>
<DIV dir=3Dltr><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Think we need =
to abstract the=20
versioning that the CDB uses&nbsp;in that case. Externally&nbsp;I assume =
that=20
any customer will be able to upgrade directly to Lambo from 12.x, 13.x.x =
and=20
2.x, is that still the case? Also assume that 2.2 will be able to =
upgrade to any=20
future release?</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=3D-1>
<FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2><B>From:</B> Tim Gardner<BR><B>Sent:</B> =
Wed 11/22/2006=20
5:52 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Sandrine Boulanger; dl-Clio; =
dl-lambo<BR><B>Subject:</B>=20
RE: product version numbering<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#000080 =
size=3D2>The version=20
number has to be known to the cluster DB upgrade code to make decisions =
about=20
how</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#000080 =
size=3D2>to upgrade.=20
Chris is at the point where she needs to know for =
Lambo.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#000080 =
size=3D2>Based on=20
direction from both Jay and Jerry, we are coding Lambo to be=20
2.2.0.0.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#000080=20
size=3D2>Tim</FONT></SPAN></P><BR>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>_____________________________________________<BR></FONT></SPAN><=
SPAN=20
lang=3Den-us><B></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us><B><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>From:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us></SPAN><SPAN =
lang=3Den-us><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2> Sandrine Boulanger<BR></FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
lang=3Den-us><B></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us><B><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>Sent:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us></SPAN><SPAN =
lang=3Den-us><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2> Wednesday, November 22, 2006 5:39 =
PM<BR></FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
lang=3Den-us><B></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us><B><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>To:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us></SPAN><SPAN =
lang=3Den-us><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2> Tim Gardner; dl-Clio; =
dl-lambo<BR></FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
lang=3Den-us><B></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us><B><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>Subject:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us></SPAN><SPAN =
lang=3Den-us><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2> RE: product version numbering</FONT></SPAN><SPAN =

lang=3Den-us></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#000080 =
size=3D2>Which piece=20
of code has dependency on the version? We should avoid this as much as=20
possible&#8230;</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>_____________________________________________<BR></FONT></SPAN><=
SPAN=20
lang=3Den-us><B></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us><B><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>From:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us></SPAN><SPAN =
lang=3Den-us><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2> Tim Gardner<BR></FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
lang=3Den-us><B></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us><B><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>Sent:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us></SPAN><SPAN =
lang=3Den-us><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2> Wednesday, November 22, 2006 5:17 =
PM<BR></FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
lang=3Den-us><B></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us><B><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>To:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us></SPAN><SPAN =
lang=3Den-us><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2> dl-Clio; dl-lambo<BR></FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
lang=3Den-us><B></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us><B><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>Subject:</FONT></B></SPAN><SPAN lang=3Den-us></SPAN><SPAN =
lang=3Den-us><FONT=20
face=3DTahoma size=3D2> product version numbering</FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
lang=3Den-us></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>There was =
some confusion=20
in the dev meeting today with regard to product version=20
numbering.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I =
confirmed the following=20
numbering scheme with Jay:</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Clio&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2.1.0.0</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Lambo&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2.2.0.0</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>DeLorean&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
2.3.0.0</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This was =
discussed and=20
agreed to in the first lambo project planning meeting.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This is =
the numbering=20
scheme that development is coding to.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P align=3Dleft><SPAN lang=3Den-us><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Tim</FONT></SPAN></P><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C70EA4.8623C697--
