You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Now that we are setting up automated builds (see issue #333) it is time to think about the format of the version string. One option is to continue with the current scheme which does not seem to be documented AFAICT. That is, strings like 93u+ (the version most commonly encountered on a distro) or 93v- (the version at the time the project was open sourced). Presumably the letter was being incremented whenever a stable minor release point was reached. No idea what the minus or plus symbols represent.
A second option is to switch to semantic versioning. This would use a string of the form major.minor.patch-level; e.g., 93.15.0. When building from any git commit without a version tag the current git commit hash would be appended to the most recent version tag. This is my preferred solution.
There are probably other options as well. Anyone with an opinion please feel free to comment.
Now that we are setting up automated builds (see issue #333) it is time to think about the format of the version string. One option is to continue with the current scheme which does not seem to be documented AFAICT. That is, strings like
93u+(the version most commonly encountered on a distro) or93v-(the version at the time the project was open sourced). Presumably the letter was being incremented whenever a stable minor release point was reached. No idea what the minus or plus symbols represent.A second option is to switch to semantic versioning. This would use a string of the form
major.minor.patch-level; e.g.,93.15.0. When building from any git commit without a version tag the current git commit hash would be appended to the most recent version tag. This is my preferred solution.There are probably other options as well. Anyone with an opinion please feel free to comment.