[ofiwg] post OFI 1.0

[Hefty, Sean]

> > * Should releases be 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc. or 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3?
> 
> One random point: this might be useful reading when considering versioning
> schemes:
> 
>     http://semver.org/

That site would suggest that most libfabric releases over the next couple of years will be of the form 1.y.

7.Minor version Y (x.Y.z | x > 0) MUST be incremented if new, backwards compatible functionality is introduced to the public API. It MUST be incremented if any public API functionality is marked as deprecated. It MAY be incremented if substantial new functionality or improvements are introduced within the private code. It MAY include patch level changes. Patch version MUST be reset to 0 when minor version is incremented.

Most (all?) of the OFA packages bump only the lower number for new releases, except for the OFED package which aligns with the base linux kernel number.  Hence*, why I'm bringing this up.
 
The exception is that the next release after 1.0 may be either 1.0.1 or 1.1, depending on how much content can be completed within the next 2 months.

- Sean 


* 3 points to Ravenclaw for using the word hence in an email