On 4 Nov 2008, at 15:42, Quentin Mathé wrote: > Hi, > > I was thinking about the fact we got to update the VERSION variable > for the frameworks that are going to be part of the next release 0.4.
Good idea. > For example, EtoileFoundation declares VERSION = 0.1, do you agree to > update to 0.4 all stable frameworks in both trunk and stable branches? > David, is this also ok for frameworks such as LanguageKit, MediaKit > etc.? Makes sense. There might be some confusion with the version number for LanguageKit running backwards briefly, but it's probably better to do that now than later. > Is there anything else we should take in account or discuss for the > versionning of modules? I haven't give any thoughts to the need of > packagers… I think sensible monotonic versions will help packagers. I do wonder if we should separate out the Étoilé version and the framework version. For example, I doubt OgreKit will change between 0.4.0 and 0.4.1, but LanguageKit will. Updating both of them to 0.4.1 doesn't entirely make sense. Perhaps we should declare ETOILE_VERSION=0.4 in etoile.make and have each framework use $(ETOILE_VERSION).0 now and bump that to .1 if it changes for 0.4.1? Even this isn't ideal, since it makes it difficult to track which components have changed with an increase in Étoilé version. GNOME and KDE both version their components separately from the desktop environment releases, so I don't have a problem with us doing that, as long as we remember to increment the versions for everything that's changed before each release (i.e. first commit in stable after a release should bump the revision number). David _______________________________________________ Etoile-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-dev
