The problem with d & e is I do not think they address the user interpretation of our version string. Using "master" as a prefix or suffix probably doesn't mean much to many users. You may be expecting users to be more informed about versioning than they actually are.
Wayne On 7/10/19 12:19 PM, Nick Østergaard wrote: > d: keep it as is > > e: prepend the branch to what we currently have > > On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 at 17:55, Wayne Stambaugh <stambau...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 7/9/19 4:49 PM, Carsten Schoenert wrote: >>> Hello Nick, >>> >>> Am 09.07.19 um 21:57 schrieb Nick Østergaard: >>>> I have a hard time to understand how 5.99 is better to describe a >>>> development version. 6.00 was already a bad way to describe it. >>>> People also were confused. To me .99 seems very arbitrary. Why not >>>> .1234? >>> simply your mind is interpreting this different than .99. ;) >>> >>> GTK+ is doing this scheme with .90 to .99 for quite a while and this is >>> *oneway* to do it. >>> >>> https://blog.gtk.org/2016/09/01/versioning-and-long-term-stability-promise-in-gtk/ >>> >>> KiCad is not the first project that needs to find it's own agreement on >>> the versioning. (And wont be the last.) >>> >>> I'm personally not that happy with the usage of the 'git describe' >>> command and the reading of tags from the tree. It was never a good >>> approach in my eyes and it is currently really horrible for users to >>> interpret the numbering schema. Even the current HEAD on the stable >>> branch has a wrong number starting with. >> >> I want to keep the sha hash so we know which commit was used to create >> nightly builds. While `git describe` isn't perfect, it does a pretty >> good job of giving us the information we need. >> >>> >>> Why not hard-code the prefix within the CMake scripting voodoo like done >>> in probably the majority of recent project that using autotools for >>> configuration and add the commit count and id as a suffix like done now >>> already? >> >> We do this in KiCadVersion.cmake but this is only used as a fallback >> when git isn't available during config. >> >>> >>> And a prefix '6.0-dev' or 'master-dev' is always better than the current >>> solution. >>> >> >> We abandoned the "-dev" suffix because package devs were complaining >> that "6.0-dev" was causing packaging version comparison issues. If that >> is not the case, then we need to get a consensus among the package devs >> for a solution that works for all platform package managers. I'm >> guessing the ".99" (or some other sufficiently large number) would work >> and also make it clear to users that they are using a version newer than >> the current stable version. >> >> In short, we need a solution that >> >> a: solves the packaging version comparison issue on all platforms >> >> b: makes it clear to users that they are using a version greater than >> the current stable release >> >> c: provides the needed developer information on nightly builds >> >> Am I missing anything here? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
