On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 09:55:16PM +0100, Lele Gaifax wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:26:20 -0600, Luke Blanshard <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> >>> The problem is if you don't know what your next version number
> >>> will be. httpd sort of gets around this by having
> >>> stable/unstable version numbers. (APR sort of has this same
> >>> problem - there isn't an ability to release unstable releases
> >>> in its versioning scheme.) -- justin
Well, in Subversion's scheme, we don't have to know the next number. Maybe
you were saying "svn is nice cuz look at this problem in httpd/apr"
> LB> Subversion effectively has two different version numbers: the
> LB> label and the repository revision number. The label is more
> LB> human readable; the revision number is more precise. You just
> LB> need to come up with a label that is imprecise for all the
> LB> revisions between releases.
> I still think that a reasonable way of keeping the two concepts would
> be putting the revision number in a fourth slot of the version. It may
> even be that official revision (those stored under tags) lacks that
> part, but I think that, among SVN developers, the revision number is a
> somewhat more interesting thing to have at hand. Current svn would
> report something line "0.16.1@4326", although some one speaking of
> simply "0.16.1" implies the official release.
We have that today. The tarballs are distributed such that you build them
and get "0.16.1 (r4276)" as the long version name. But if you get a copy of
Subversion from source control, then it will be "0.16.1 (dev build)".
I like the + idea, and can certainly arrange that.
The one thing that we can't do for a dev build is have "the" revision number
appear in the executable. As has been said many times before, when you
build, you could have a mixed-revision working copy, so there is no single
revision number to insert.
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Fri Jan 10 22:24:32 2003