diff options
Diffstat (limited to '.be/bea86499-824e-4e77-b085-2d581fa9ccab/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/f925e56f-26f9-4620-82fb-a0f160f27921/body')
| -rw-r--r-- | .be/bea86499-824e-4e77-b085-2d581fa9ccab/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/f925e56f-26f9-4620-82fb-a0f160f27921/body | 88 |
1 files changed, 88 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.be/bea86499-824e-4e77-b085-2d581fa9ccab/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/f925e56f-26f9-4620-82fb-a0f160f27921/body b/.be/bea86499-824e-4e77-b085-2d581fa9ccab/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/f925e56f-26f9-4620-82fb-a0f160f27921/body new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5eeb353 --- /dev/null +++ b/.be/bea86499-824e-4e77-b085-2d581fa9ccab/bugs/529c290e-b1cf-4800-be7e-68f1ecb9565c/comments/f925e56f-26f9-4620-82fb-a0f160f27921/body @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 07:32:31PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: +> "W. Trevor King" <wking@drexel.edu> writes: +> +> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:54:05AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: +> > > "W. Trevor King" <wking@drexel.edu> writes: +> > > +> > > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 10:36:26PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: +> > > > > Please, no. Timestamps aren't version strings, that's conflating +> > > > > two pieces of information with very different meanings. +> > > > > Correlating the two is the job of a [NEWS file]. +> > +> > > If you want a monotonically-increasing indicator of which revision +> > > we're up to, that's immediately available with the revision number +> > > from VCS on the main branch. That also has the advantage of +> > > producing consecutive numbers for each revision, by definition. +> > +> > But not during branch-switches, while my method skips large regions, +> > but probably increases during any reasonable branch-switch. +> +> I've read this several times now, and I don't see what it's saying. +> +> The assumption I'm making is that there is a single canonical “main +> branch”, from which releases will be made. + +I don't think you need to assume this. See my "virtual branch" +argument below. + +> The version number set in that branch is the one which determines +> the version of Bugs Everywhere as a whole. + +If you are suggesting that the dev branches adjust their release +number _by_hand_ to match the current trunk release number, that +allows switching, but sounds like a lot of work and isn't correct +anyway, since they are not in the same state as the trunk. + +> The revision number is only useful in the context of the branch, so it +> only matters when comparing versions within a branch. When you switch +> between branches, if you're interested in the revision number you'll +> still need to know which branch you're talking about. + +I think this is our main disagreement. I see all the branches as part +of the same codebase, with monotonically increasing timestamp patch +numbers. If you were to collapse all the commit snapshots down into a +single chronological "virtual branch", it would still make sense, it +would just be a bit unorganized. We do all try to move in the same +general direction ;). + +> Switching between branches doesn't change the canonical version string. + +Different released code should have different version numbers. + +> > For example, when I upgraded to rich root to pull Ben's patch, I'm not +> > sure if Chris upgraded the trunk and merged my branch, or just ditched +> > the trunk and cloned my branch. Using actual bzr revision numbers +> > would make switching branches that either wrong (in the case of rev-id +> > decreases) or confusing (in the case of a single non-consecutive +> > increase). +> +> This, then, is an argument for not having the revision number in the +> version string at all. The version then becomes a more traditional +> “major.minor.patch” tuple, and is only ever updated when some release +> manager of the canonical branch decides it's correct to do so. + +It is an argument for not using the revision number. You can avoid +revision numbers by using hand-coded patch numbers, or by using +timestamps, which is what we're trying to decide on :p. + +> If we use the ‘bzr version-info --format=python > foo_version.py’ +> command in some build routine, the branch's revision number will be +> available directly within Python by importing that module. That would +> allow it to be output in some UI, if that's what you're interested in +> seeing. + +True. Which means that whichever version string wins out, the other +side will still be able to access the info we both want included ;). +We can certainly suggest that bug reporters submit their + be --verbose-version +when they submit bugs. The only role of the official "version string" +is to make life easy for packagers. If they woln't be switching +branches, then either of our proposals are fine. If they will, then +I think timestamps work better. + +-- +This email may be signed or encrypted with GPG (http://www.gnupg.org). +The GPG signature (if present) will be attached as 'signature.asc'. +For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy + +My public key is at http://www.physics.drexel.edu/~wking/pubkey.txt |