This project is mirrored from https://gitee.com/mirrors/nomad.git. Pull mirroring failed .
Repository mirroring has been paused due to too many failed attempts. It can be resumed by a project maintainer.
  1. 01 Mar, 2022 2 commits
  2. 28 Feb, 2022 3 commits
  3. 25 Feb, 2022 4 commits
  4. 24 Feb, 2022 14 commits
  5. 23 Feb, 2022 11 commits
  6. 22 Feb, 2022 4 commits
  7. 19 Feb, 2022 2 commits
    • Michael Schurter's avatar
      docs: add changelog for #11600 · 62ea60d0
      Michael Schurter authored
      62ea60d0
    • Michael Schurter's avatar
      core: remove all traces of unused protocol version · 2411d3af
      Michael Schurter authored
      Nomad inherited protocol version numbering configuration from Consul and
      Serf, but unlike those projects Nomad has never used it. Nomad's
      `protocol_version` has always been `1`.
      
      While the code is effectively unused and therefore poses no runtime
      risks to leave, I felt like removing it was best because:
      
      1. Nomad's RPC subsystem has been able to evolve extensively without
         needing to increment the version number.
      2. Nomad's HTTP API has evolved extensively without increment
         `API{Major,Minor}Version`. If we want to version the HTTP API in the
         future, I doubt this is the mechanism we would choose.
      3. The presence of the `server.protocol_version` configuration
         parameter is confusing since `server.raft_protocol` *is* an important
         parameter for operators to consider. Even more confusing is that
         there is a distinct Serf protocol version which is included in `nomad
         server members` output under the heading `Protocol`. `raft_protocol`
         is the *only* protocol version relevant to Nomad developers and
         operators. The other protocol versions are either deadcode or have
         never changed (Serf).
      4. If we were to need to version the RPC, HTTP API, or Serf protocols, I
         don't think these configuration parameters and variables are the best
         choice. If we come to that point we should choose a versioning scheme
         based on the use case and modern best practices -- not this 6+ year
         old dead code.
      2411d3af