<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2654.45">
<TITLE>RE: [Openib-windows] Branding</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> From: Fab Tillier [<A HREF="mailto:ftillier@silverstorm.com">mailto:ftillier@silverstorm.com</A>] </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 6:36 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> To: 'Yossi Leybovich'; openib-windows@openib.org</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Subject: RE: [Openib-windows] Branding</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > From: Yossi Leybovich [<A HREF="mailto:sleybo@mellanox.co.il">mailto:sleybo@mellanox.co.il</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 2:12 AM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > From: Fab Tillier [<A HREF="mailto:ftillier@silverstorm.com">mailto:ftillier@silverstorm.com</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 12:10 AM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > ></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > Folks,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > ></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > I just checked in changes to brand the binaries created when </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > building this code as OpenIB binaries rather than any particular </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > vendor.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> ></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > As I recall we agreed on COPMANY_NAME environment variable that by </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > default will change to be "OpenIB". (I also sent you patch that do </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > that for wsd installer.) After we agreed that each company </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> will need </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > to maintain its own inf files, why not to let each company </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> that would </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > like supply binaries to give it own version,company name </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> and product </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > name.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Customers don't want vendor provided binaries for the core </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> components - there's no way to tell if vendor X's release is </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> compatible with Vendor Y, even if they both claim that their </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> binaries are OpenIB code. The core in this case is at a </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> minimum the access layer, the HCA drivers, IPoIB, SRP, and </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> WSD. OpenSM probably belongs in there too, but that's up to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Mellanox to make that call.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>I don't argue about what customers want (maybe our customers are different from yours) but simply suggest a way to satisfy all of us.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>If the default environment variables will be "OpenIB alliance" etc. then on clean OpenIB build you got the same result as you want ,and still give the option to Mellanox (and other companies that want to create binaries for them self and their customers) to have their own signature of product version etc.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>About portability that issue that each vendor that supply its binaries need to solve.</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> I am going to build binaries and post them on the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> windows.openib.org web server for anyone to use, with the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> expectation that all vendors will package these up in their </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> releases. See the email I sent last week after the OpenIB </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> board meeting when the board agreed this was a good idea.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>That really good idea and you right the signature should be OpenIB alliance </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>I still did not figure who/how you control the version number (like when we change the major release number ?)</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> Since the core binaries will have the SVN repository version </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> information, it will be easy for customers to identify any </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> interoperability issues they might encounter.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Lastly, if you do want a vendor branded solution, you can </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> modify the versioning file in your repository - presumably </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> you also have other changes you haven't put back into the SVN </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> repository, so you're already managing two trees that are out </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> of sync. If the trees are in sync, what are you gaining by </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> applying your own version information aside from confusing </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> the customer?</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>That exactly what I want to avoid , I want to be identical to the OpenIB as much as possible ( including ics_ver.h file)</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>The only changes from OpenIB that I want in my release should be from real reasons (like bugs that OpenIB did not patch yet)</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > This affected any component that used to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > include ics_ver.h, which has been renamed oib_ver.h and </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> picks up the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > SVN revision through the VER_OPENIB environment variable </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> (which must </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > be set or build will fail).</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> ></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > Why not to let companies to decide on their version calling </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> mechanism </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > and keep default to the OpenIB. I would prefer to see 4 </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> numbers with </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > environment variables, 3 numbers are the release number </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> (i.e. 1.2.0 ) </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > and the last one is the SVN number</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> You can version your private binaries however you like - </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> there's nothing preventing you from having your own version </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> numbers, company, and product names in your private </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> repository. However, they will not be official OpenIB </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> binaries if you do so.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>I agree , but I suggest that versions will be different, still the sources will be identical in all files that we did not touch.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> - Fab</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>