[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Version numbering

From: Gary V. Vaughan
Subject: Re: Version numbering
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:15:27 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20030925 Thunderbird/0.3

Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
"Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <address@hidden> writes:


 Gary> And that's why people find our version scheme confusing.  I'm not sure
 Gary> how we ended up working in this way, I think we copied it from
Gary> Automake?
Tsk tsk tsk.  Libtool used that scheme first.  Automake copied it
when we started to have branches.

Ah, okay. I'm beginning to have a sneaking suspicion I might have invented it :-/ Silly me!

 Gary> Anyhow, I'm fed up of having to explain it, when we could
 Gary> just make it intuitive :-)

I didn't understand your proposal, but I hope you are not
planning to make 2.2 < 2.3a < 2.3.  That would be counter
intuitive.  IMHO any numbering scheme ought to work with `ls -v'.

Actually, that is what I'm proposing: I've had to explain it many, many times over the years, and people just expect to see alpha/beta releases named after the final release they are heading towards.

Your point about `ls -v' is a good one though. I'll put an extra `-' before the letter:

    ] touch libtool-1.5.tar.gz libtool-1.6a.tar.gz libtool-1.6.tar.gz
    ] \ls -1 -v
    ] mv libtool-1.6a.tar.gz libtool-1.6-a.tar.gz
    ] \ls -1 -v

  ())_.  Gary V. Vaughan    gary@(|
  ( '/   Research Scientist       ,_())____
  / )=   GNU Hacker  \'      `&
`(_~)_   Tech' Author   =`---d__/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]