[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: version numbering and release lines

From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_lyra.org>
Date: 2004-01-30 22:23:00 CET

On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 02:01:05PM -0600, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
>...
> Good points! How about this:
>
> Working copy and repository formats are backward- and
> forward-compatible for all patch releases in the same minor series.
> They are backward-compatible for all minor releases in the same
> major series; however, a minor release is allowed to make a working
> copy or repository that doesn't work with previous minor releases,
> where "make" could mean "upgrade" as well as "create".

Agreed.

We should also put these notions into APR's versioning document. Not
"working copy" or "repository", but it can talk about client/server
compatibility and "data" compatibility.

>...
> The important thing about patch releases is really that they are
> *both* forward- and backward-compatible. Minor releases might only be
> backward-compatible, both ABI- and API-wise...

Correct.

[ note that I tried to avoid the use of the word "backward" in the
  versioning document, as the semantics are a bit loose. (if the context
  isn't _just_so_, then the compatibility direction is unclear)

>...
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>...
> > I think if we answer that, we're pretty much agreed on everything.
>
> Well, changing svn_client_blame's signature in 1.1 would be not merely
> an ABI change, but an API change as well, thus simply not allowed. We
> have to do it by adding svn_client_blame2.
>
> So I think the answer there is pretty clear.

The answer is clear if you agree with the versioning document. I think
Justin was seeking to "force the issue" with his question. If you're of
the mindset that the signature should change, then we've got a whole new
discussion to have :-)

>...
> David Summers asked:
>...
> > If so, would it be wise to go ahead and switch to that nomenclature?
>
> Conceptually correct, but let's not switch to the new nomenclature
> until after 1.0.0 is out. We've been using the interim release system
> for a long time, people understand it, and we already said what 0.37
> means. If we release the same code under a new name, we'll only
> create confusion.

Agreed.

Thanks for the excellent writeup, Karl.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jan 30 22:18:00 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.