[darcs-users] darcs version scheme (let's use odds/evens next time)

Jason Dagit dagit at codersbase.com
Fri Feb 19 18:10:34 UTC 2010


On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Eric Kow <kowey at darcs.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 18:54:41 +0100, Ben Franksen wrote:
> > I can't see any win here over the current system which I personally find
> > perfectly fine and understandable. The 97...99 numbers give clear
> intuition
> > that they are "close to the next version number". The odd/even scheme
> does
> > not have this property. The only advantage of the latter system lies in
> the
> > ability to actually _release_ intermediate development versions for
> > testing. If you plan to do so, well, I'd agree. Otherwise keep it as it
> is.
>
> We do release intermediate development versions for testing (just very
> close to the actual release date).
>
> You also made me realise that this has the drawback of not making the
> distinction between work in HEAD prior to the pre-release, and to the
> pre-release itself.
>
> So I suggest instead a variant of the idea:
>
>  darcs 2.5.0.x   for unstable work after darcs 2.4 is out
>  darcs 2.5.97.x  for darcs 2.6 alphas
>  darcs 2.5.98.x  for darcs 2.6 betas
>  darcs 2.5.99.x  for darcs 2.6 release candidates
>

As one of the main complainers about the current scheme, let me throw in my
opinion.

The thing I find confusing isn't the number or the flip flopping of odd/even
or any of that.  It's the duplicity of the names.

Current we have darcs 2.4 beta 3 which is the same source code as 2.3.99 (or
something close to that).  What I find confusing is that one version of
darcs has several aliases.  From my perspective, we will continue to have
confusing version numbering until we address this duplicity.

What I would like to see:  One source version, one version name.

The problem is that when someone says they are using 2.3.98.1 and I'm using
darcs 2.4 beta 1, I don't know if we're using the same version.  I default
to assuming we're not.

So, what I see proposed above doesn't seem to reduce the duplicity. We still
have two names for some versions (2.5.97.x/2.6 alpha).

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20100219/a87946ff/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the darcs-users mailing list