kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Chris Pavlina <pavlina.chris@xxxxxxxxx>]

Let's just not do more than one format change in a single day... I think that
would be a beneficial decision for project stability as well...

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 05:26:27PM +0200, Timofonic wrote:
> Despite my very limited knowledge, I like the simple approach. 
> 
> What about using letters if more than one format change is done? 
> 
> 20160412A, 20160412B, 20160412C...
> 
> On April 12, 2016 2:30:23 PM CEST, Chris Pavlina <pavlina.chris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >Honestly I don't see the advantage to using Semantic Versioning for an
> >internal file format version... and using 2016.04.12 instead of
> >20160412
> >just seems like an exercise in making the parser more complicated.
> >Could
> >you explain *why* this would be a good thing?
> >On Apr 12, 2016 1:51 AM, "David Cary" <d.cary+2012@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> Please at least consider Semantic Versioning ( http://semver.org/ ).
> >> And I recommend that if you figure out any way to improve on SemVer,
> >> please speak up so maybe the next version of SemVer can incorporate
> >> those improvements.
> >>
> >> I have enjoyed the discussion of new features and various ideas for
> >> versioning, and I encourage you to discuss them further.
> >>
> >> I am happy that the native KiCad file formats already avoid many
> >> problems mentioned in
> >> "Designing File Formats" http://www.fadden.com/tech/file-formats.html
> >> .
> >> Are there any remaining recommendations in that essay that maybe we
> >> should include in future versions of KiCad file formats?
> >>
> >> If hypothetically we did use Semantic Versioning,
> >> would it be better to do (a) or (b)?:
> >> (a) have a single KiCad version number that KiCad writes into every
> >> new file it creates, or
> >> (b) have a separate and independent version number for each part of
> >> KiCad -- the Eeschema version number written into new schematic
> >files,
> >> a separate Pcbnew version number written into new footprint and PCB
> >> layout files, etc.
> >>
> >> (How many independent version numbers could option (b) require?)
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Chris Pavlina
> ><pavlina.chris@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> wrote:
> >> > What about using the date the change was made as a "version
> >number"? Can
> >> > integerize it like 20160407 for example. This allows easy
> >> cross-referencing of
> >> > a format version with the revision that it was made in, and is
> >> guaranteed to
> >> > increase monotonically if you use a YMD format :)
> >>
> >> I agree with Wayne that it's more meaningful than most version
> >strings.
> >>
> >> My understanding is that "integerized date" without punctuation is
> >> more commonly known as the "ISO 8601 date basic format".
> >>
> >> Recently I've been putting a date like that on the silkscreen of my
> >> PCBs. (I use the "ISO 8601 date extended format" like 2016-04-07, the
> >> format produced by the KiCad "%D" format symbol).
> >>
> >> Is it possible to combine that with Semantic versioning, getting
> >> something like 2016.04.07 ?
> >> (This assumes we won't make a breaking change in the file format more
> >> than once a year -- optimistic? :-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> David Cary
> >> +1(918)813-2279
> >> http://OpenCircuits.com/
> >> http://david.carybros.com/
> >>
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 
> -- 
> Enviado desde mi dispositivo Android con K-9 Mail. Por favor disculpa mi brevedad.