On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 06:48:04PM +0100, Thilo Borgmann wrote: > Am 04.03.16 um 17:57 schrieb Timothy Gu: > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 10:55:42AM +0100, Thilo Borgmann wrote: > >> Am 04.03.16 um 08:58 schrieb wm4: > >>> > >>> Being able to see the, well, version in the version output (instead of > >>> random numbers) sounds like a pretty convincing argument. > >> > >> Neither a good play on words nor elaborative; not even helpful. > >> > >> You say they are random numbers, CE says it is continuous. What is correct? > > > > It is continuous. But to the user's eye, N-71234 is no different from > > N-41234, > > and hence "random." > > I assume that if there is no difference in the user's eye between > N-71234 and N-41234 then there is also no difference for that user > between dev-123 and dev-346.
That's not the point. The point is that there is something before the dev part, and that's what makes the difference. When I said "no different," I meant except the fact that N-71234 is obviously newer. The fact that it fails to convey any additional information is the issue we are trying to attack. > > > >> So what about the release tag? Well it is a quite useful extension because > >> of > >> the already mentioned possibility of determining the existing features at > >> once. > >> I'm pro adding it to the version string. > >> > >> The tag-tag? (devxy) I don't see it anywhere except in git and therefore > >> it is > >> uselessly redundant to the existing hash tag in my eyes. Why add another > >> more > >> roughly estimation of the users repo-state? I don't think this should be > >> added > >> to the version string. > > > > Can you elaborate on this? I am not sure I understand everything you are > > saying. Specfically, what is "devxy"? > > The core concern about it is that is just redundant. I assume Timo to be > correct about: > > "A new dev tag is made every time a release is branched off, to indicate > development of the next ffmpeg version started there, ..." > > Then there is no gain of information in the dev-123 tag if there is > already the release number given. In that case "v4.5-gdeabdef" tells me > the very same as "v4.5-dev-123-gdeabdef" does. If Timo is correct, the > can never be a "4.5-dev-789-abcdefg" tag. v4.5 is just enough. > > Summing it all up for me, I think a release prefix would make perfect > sense. Thus, switching from > > N-12345-abcdefg > > to > > v4.5-N-12345-abcdefg > > should be done for the sake of the users. There is at least CE wanting > to stick with N-tags so why not? The only reason I can imagine for > getting rid of N-tags and/or including dev-123 tags would be that a > native git show command needs it to work properly as well as giving > better human readable information. I see where you are coming from. I will address this issue in my reply to Reimar. Timothy _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
