Hi Tom,

My apologies for the issues the patch to AC_INIT caused with TOCALL and
thank you for the explanation of versioning semantics.  It was a bad
assumption on my part, carried over from $dayjob, when I didn't see a
release tag for 2.1.5 in the repo.  100% my mistake.

Also, thank you to Iain for the identifying and addressing the bug in
Debian source package, which will now report 2.1.5 in the Help->About
dialog.

Regards,
tony

On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 10:45:51AM -0700, Tom Russo wrote:
> This is a forwarded version of an email sent to the Xastir mailing list.
> I am forwarding to you because you followed up to a different message on that 
> list.
> 
> To answer your direct question, "Since we are
> building from a snapshot - i.e., a version somewhere between 2.1.4 and
> 2.1.5, is there a preference for which we use for configure?"
> 
> This is mistaken.  You are in fact using 2.1.5, which means 
> "development version between 2.1.4.  and whatever our next release will be 
> called."  Since this version number is used to construct the TOCALL,  the 
> version number in AC_INIT should just be left at 2.1.5.
> 
> 2.1.5 will never be "released", and the presence of APX215 in the TOCALL
> is supposed to say "this user is using a bleeding-edge version pulled
> from git".  Our next release will get a version number bump.
> 
> The Xastir build system tries to construct a useful Version string to display
> in the Help->About and also to print when Xastir is invoked with "-V", but
> this trick only works if the code is being built from a git clone (it sticks 
> the current SHA-1 into the version displayed in these places, but does NOT
> screw up the TOCALL).  That won't work if you're building the Debian package
> out of a tarball (the trick involves looking for a .git directory, and if 
> found, invoking a git log command to get the current SHA-1).
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from Tom Russo <ru...@bogodyn.org> -----
> 
> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 10:26:41 -0700
> From: Tom Russo <ru...@bogodyn.org>
> To: Xastir - APRS client software discussion <xas...@xastir.org>
> Subject: Re: [Xastir] Fwd: Bug#952116: xastir: Impossible to transmit due to
>       malformed TOCALL
> 
> Xastir's versions are goofy.  The history of this is ancient, and there has 
> been no reason to ungoof it.
> 
> Even numbers are releases, odd numbers are working development versions,
> and are generally not updated for every commit --- Xastir 2.1.5 just means
> "development branch after stable 2.1.4".
> 
> The TOCALL for the current development version of Xastir should be APX215,
> and there should be no need for finer granularity to show which commit on
> every transmit.  The ambiguity of "which commit of the dev branch am I using?"
> is resolved using the Help->About box.  This can only matter to the user 
> him/her
> self, and need not be transmitted in every packet.  A TOCALL of APX215 should
> be enough for all interested parties on the receive end.
> 
> If there is a need for a stable release so that distros can have a stable 
> version, we should push one out.  There is an open project on github for our 
> next release with a number of required fixes before we do it.  There was a 
> flurry of activity on some of those issues a while back, but between people
> being injured, having other projects, and what not, nothing's been done for
> quite a while.
> 
> If there is a real need for a stable release, we could probably use a little
> help.  The open issues that we expected to have fixed for the next release
> (nominally dubbed Xastir 2.2.0) can be seen at:
> 
> https://github.com/Xastir/Xastir/projects/2
> 
> Some might need punting.
> 
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 08:56:54AM -0800, we recorded a bogon-computron 
> collision of the <xas...@trinnet.net> flavor, containing:
> > 
> > Hello Dave,
> > 
> > The scenario here seems to be if you're running an intermediate release
> > Xastir and not an official tagged release.
> > 
> > Dave, yes, I see you on APRS-IS : https://aprs.fi/info/a/KB3EFS and it shows
> > you're running v2.15 (APX215) per the "Last Path" line:
> > 
> >    KB3EFS>*APX215* via TCPIP*,qAC,T2ONTARIO
> > 
> > 
> > The question here is if you're running a version of Xastir that's between
> > v2.15 and v2.16, what should Xastir report as it's version to APRS-IS?  It's
> > not clear if it's illegal but maybe this would be legal:
> > 
> >    APX21G
> > 
> > --David
> > KI6ZHD
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 02/23/2020 08:43 AM, David A Aitcheson wrote:
> > > I did & was checking validity before making noise...
> > > 
> > > Given that I  only am able to be on APRS via an Internet connection
> > > (read: no radio use allowed)...
> > > 
> > > Given that I only build from source (read: I don't use a package from a
> > > repository)...
> > > 
> > > I think that it is not effecting me...
> > > 
> > > David KI6ZHD - can you see me ( "KB3EFS" ) on the map in NY State?
> > > 
> > > 73
> > > Dave
> > > KB3EFS
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xastir mailing list
> > xas...@lists.xastir.org
> > http://xastir.org/mailman/listinfo/xastir
> 
> -- 
> Tom Russo    KM5VY
> Tijeras, NM  
> 
>  echo "prpv_a'rfg_cnf_har_cvcr" | sed -e 's/_/ /g' | tr [a-m][n-z] [n-z][a-m]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xastir mailing list
> xas...@lists.xastir.org
> http://xastir.org/mailman/listinfo/xastir
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
> -- 
> Tom Russo    KM5VY
> Tijeras, NM  
> 
>  echo "prpv_a'rfg_cnf_har_cvcr" | sed -e 's/_/ /g' | tr [a-m][n-z] [n-z][a-m]

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to