[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [virt-tools-list] VirtViewer version scheme and Windows ProductVersion



On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:54:41AM -0400, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> 
> 
> ----- Mensaje original -----
> > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 03:06:47AM +0200, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> > > Hi
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange redhat com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I would like to know what is the purpose of the leading 0.
> > > >
> > > > It is simply part of the version number,  (major, minor, micro).
> > > > That it is zero simply means I've not considered us to be at
> > > > version 1.0.0 yet. It doesn't indicate that the leading 0 is
> > > > unused.
> > > 
> > > What would you consider to be 1.0.0 ?
> > 
> > Originally I had planned to declare it 1.0.0 when I had refactored it
> > to provide a library API for embedding. That's unlikely to be any time
> > soon though, so it is possible we should just declare our next release
> > which includes non-trivial new features to be 1.0.0
> > 
> > > Why not just 1.0?
> > 
> > Because I prefer 3 digit version numbers.
> 
> What is the difference between "minor" and "micro" in your naming? How
> can it be decided or interpreted between one or the other? It is worth
> to have some clear rule for versioning.

micro is intended for releases that are mostly bugfixing, minor for
releases introducing non-trivial new features, major for large new
features or changes which are disruptive to user experiance

> > > Well, upstream would have the same issue if it would have a "stable"
> > > release of some sort.
> 
> You drop the possibility to make stable windows installer releases upstream?
> 
> Or you would implement the 8 bit shifting of "minor" in the productversion "build" field?

I don't think this drops that ability at all. There is plenty of scope
in the windows version numbers to encode even a 4 digit version number
and a build number.  The micro numbers rarely go above 10, if we had
a stable branch that'd be pretty unlikely to go above 10 in numbers
so you could easily encode those two digits into one byte, leaving a
second byte for the build number

Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]