[zeromq-dev] Pattern for clean shutdown of a proxy loop

Cosmo Harrigan cosmo.harrigan at singularityu.org
Fri Mar 21 02:06:08 CET 2014


If this fix is backported without incrementing the minor version number,
then it presents the challenge of how to identify whether the functionality
is present on a particular system when wrapping it in a language binding,
because version 4.0.4 could refer both to the prior version without the
functionality, or to the later version with the functionality.

Cosmo


On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:43 PM, MinRK <benjaminrk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Amending the rules is fine, I just wanted to point out that you can't
> > backport new features without updating the minor version number within
> the
> > current definitions of libzmq minor and patch versions.
> >
> > As an author and user of the pyzmq bindings, there is no cost to me in
> > failing to backport the steerable function. I have used zmq_proxy daily
> > (since it was called zmq_device), with no issue.  I don't actually have
> any
> > plan to expose the steerable version in pyzmq, because it doesn't offer
> any
> > real benefit in that context.
> >
> > I don't think the steerable version of the function belongs in libzmq at
> > all, so backporting it seems a bit silly to me.
>
> Points taken. It's arguable that such code belongs in libzmq at all.
> Clearly people do like it, and we know that moving common
> functionality into libzmq can be profitable. For CZMQ I rewrote the
> proxy code though.
>
> There is a tendency to wrap CZMQ instead of libzmq, and that may
> resolve this old discussion of what belongs where. I think few people
> are using the raw libzmq API any longer, so it's a bit moot.
>
> WRT versioning, our rules don't specify it (any more, unless I've
> missed something). We used to refer to semantic versioning, but that
> opened the door to catastrophic release shifts (2.x vs 3.x vs 4.x).
>
> -Pieter
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20140320/e43c8841/attachment.htm>


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list