On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 16:15, Stefan Küng <tortoise...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14.04.2012 21:31, Blair Zajac wrote: >> >> On 4/14/12 12:24 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: >>> >>> 2012/4/12 Daniel Shahaf<danie...@apache.org>: >>>> >>>> We released 1.6.18 today and 1.7.4 just over a month ago. There are >>>> a few useful items merged already, and STATUS has a truckload of pending >>>> changes. >>>> >>>> Shall we roll 1.7.5 in two weeks from today? If we can clear STATUS and >>>> roll next Thursday that's fine too, but I don't think we're in a hurry. >>> >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>> I have a proposal: >>> Skip several numbers and name the next release as "1.7.7". >>> >>> Justification: to align with TortoiseSVN, which is 1.7.6 now. >>> >>> There is a lot of "Subversion exception!" threads on users@ >>> where TortoiseSVN version is visible. For example [1]. >>> >>> I think skipping those "already used" numbers will lessen confusion. >> >> >> Since Subversion is the base project, I would rather see TortoiseSVN >> change it's versioning to match ours than the other way. TortoiseSVN >> could add an additional version number after Subversion's, e.g. >> 1.7.4-tsvn1 for the first TortoiseSVN release based on 1.7.4, >> 1.7.4-tsvn2 for the second, etc. > > > The TSVN installer already mentions the SVN version number in its file name, > e.g. > TortoiseSVN-1.7.6.22632-x64-svn-1.7.4.msi > ========= > > And the last few 1.6.x releases also didn't have matching version numbers, > e.g. > TortoiseSVN-1.6.16.21511-x64-svn-1.6.17.msi > > So that wasn't a problem back then. > Why is it now?
Konstantin suggested we change Subversion to deal with the discrepancy, rather than changing TSVN. People felt that was the wrong direction of change... I have to say: it *does* make things a bit harder on the users@ mailing list. "What? 1.7.5 has not been released yet. Were you testing with the unreleased tarball?! Did somebody release that tarball?" Cheers, -g
