On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Peter Johansson wrote:
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
Doesn't any approach which depends on an automatically generated file
assure that the version control system is one step out of date? Every time
you do a 'commit' the version file is one step newer and therefore needs to
be committed.
Your analysis seems to assume that you commit the version file into the VCS.
Yes. It assumes the model where anyone who receives the package has
the ability to build and maintain it similar to the original
maintainer. Some might say that the ability for independent
maintenance is part of the essence of free software. There are
complexities if an active version control system (with particular
access and user rights) needs to be available in order to produce a
release. It can be easily argued that if a particular instance of a
particular version control system is required, that satisfying GPL
requirements becomes problematic since the VCS becomes part of the
"build scripts" which are required to be delivered.
If the version comes from a version control system change set ID, and
the version info is also distributed in a file, then the version in
the distributed file will always be behind what the value would be if
it was comitted.
For my own package, the version info is obtained from the last
ChangeLog entry, or manually maintained info in a version.sh file, so
it is possible to commit and tag all distributed files prior to
release.
Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
