kicad-developers team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: Strange program version numbering in KiCad
Nick Østergaard <oe.nick@xxxxxxxxx>
Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>
Wed, 10 Jul 2019 15:12:48 -0400
addr=stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQGiBEM0hxQRBAC2fNh3YOVLu1d5GZ0SbrTNldGiGnCJPLqzEnqFX9v6jmf33TMt6EmSLkl6 Wtfkoj0nVwKxcYmJkA8DX0QAokBkwNIzhSsBzQvthBLIk/5LnPVVKrEXOcL4mUyH1doKlkaE slgJozNa6Av+oavcvD02o1zJOloBbaHlNlyRt7fKswCgtIFlVjWggVH/15KfWk+Qo5JVPbME AIUBAQyL2OAx0n60AWec2WHnO9buHuG0ibtICgUMkE+2MRmYyKwYRdyVwGoIUemFuOyHp0AJ InX4T+vy2E7vkwODqjtMLfIoRkokW74Fi4nrvjlhOAw/vdq/twLbAmR9MOfPTpR4y7kQy1O2 /n+RkkRvh26vTzfbQmrH7cBJhk6aA/9Uwvu3E4zNJgHVZeS0HyWtmR1eOPPRbnkPgJTToX5O KMKzTJI/FX6kT7cFoCamitHrW3BJP4Dx+cMMsa47EGxqVTdbVJ4LjogsXTXxb+0Fn1u4zBdx x3Cer6O7+hqWy7zvpzeC6nSREjqDKa5CgHtv/GLm5uFPOmsjAsnHj2tlBrQmV2F5bmUgU3Rh bWJhdWdoIDxzdGFtYmF1Z2h3QGdtYWlsLmNvbT6IeAQTEQIAOBYhBOffs6CbblRzBkv33BtR cWlZ+CReBQJbFBS2AhsDBQsJCAcCBhUKCQgLAgQWAgMBAh4BAheAAAoJEBtRcWlZ+CReMI8A nRbrLkzp7+c2f0vX7sfg4ICX8LAKAJ9uClo4uJajmZa5zZrL2nKdZlUwIrkCDQRDNIcxEAgA gCru+3/aOC6RCjpvYC72wY+d5SmHphC6yeiV2/mOumyt5MLo/Ps2GznZr11JspqFk5K/Zpvp MMLqqjDZ39+50a2iKRQFJ6NlK+hJWMmj6eJygQrCwYo3Gjc6CqfrqUv+8VSnf/i5sIZmtOVA 4ZjML18MuBvMSsNdVLFJd5HNnYb1iOECpvqdPVh/21LLCEw7MUUGGnHBhCrmk2aJe5hFmcSN g4ldBcXrgMQBwf7aMVoobXBMFDb/IENByXn0llB7Gr2IFMRmNS9/p8s/II1Yl2bTqyX4FSz8 cfn7C9KEz7faZ7wzAcpwHFC/zs3JoAjJ0IEKdNUpIwAlKMzT3CzctwADBQf/cxpG28MKyrqk nNmq/8LQLy+x6FSYXBLjxQz9BiBNYeesDZQ6J5UbL1mjpJzMa5tLZypPYo4bbGyR22hrbyDF K7m6AcVaMIJKl98g4ukMutFfAJyRDaREH5Zl/X1P4u1Z/yaAIy9mKaNbaK1/5djNJ5wCTFen TUgAp9xdc30kGkFDdLJFp5uxDY4P0vaZiZdjUCvDM3Zjv5IzpNOfxVqTUBQNUP/BnnKhkk0p DTD6s3X8S+D0rOtEBQ8K0cwERI/E8EFa8nj0TNw4e2MYGR8wg+SxqJ7z5f0zPY0bO6G9DDFB wYCqzzPWGqdAh9vA5971TAbPERtdFybhkurozp2SfYhJBBgRAgAJBQJDNIcxAhsMAAoJEBtR cWlZ+CResHUAniULLCWiT26ieRTl7N2vS6vBo/DuAJ4m7Ss/gyiW6ybTn1ctDXAUgm2QVQ==
KiCad Developers <kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2
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.
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 <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx> 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
>>> 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.
>>> 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
>> 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
>> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp