Re: [cmake-developers] Preparing for CMake 3.0-rc1
Brad King wrote: > There is one more change I'd like to make as part of the change > to the 3.0 version number. I propose that we drop the fourth > version component and use only two components for the feature > level. Makes sense to me. Thanks, Steve. -- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
Re: [cmake-developers] Preparing for CMake 3.0-rc1
On 02/07/2014 02:34 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > I guess this will mean that "minor" release are much more frequent than > historically? (About as frequent as "patch" release in the 2.x series, I > guess?) Yes. >> Future feature releases will then be numbered >> >> 3.1, 3.2, ..., 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, ... > > Out of curiosity, does this mean that 3.x will drop the convention of > odd-numbered minor versions being developmental? (Actually, I can't > recall ever actually seeing an odd-numbered minor version...) The odd/even convention was dropped back when we converted to a Git branchy workflow by commit v2.8.2~105^2~4 (New version scheme to support branchy workflow, 2010-04-23): http://cmake.org/gitweb?p=cmake.git;a=commitdiff;h=5bfffd6f It's just that "2.8" essentially became the "major" version so 2.8.x have been the minor releases, including odd 'x' values. -Brad -- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
Re: [cmake-developers] Preparing for CMake 3.0-rc1
On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 13:57:28 -0500, Brad King wrote: > Comments? So…"what the Linux kernel did"? :) I like it. --Ben -- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
Re: [cmake-developers] Preparing for CMake 3.0-rc1
On 2014-02-07 13:57, Brad King wrote: There is one more change I'd like to make as part of the change to the 3.0 version number. I propose that we drop the fourth version component and use only two components for the feature level. I guess this will mean that "minor" release are much more frequent than historically? (About as frequent as "patch" release in the 2.x series, I guess?) Future feature releases will then be numbered 3.1, 3.2, ..., 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, ... Out of curiosity, does this mean that 3.x will drop the convention of odd-numbered minor versions being developmental? (Actually, I can't recall ever actually seeing an odd-numbered minor version...) -- Matthew -- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
Re: [cmake-developers] Preparing for CMake 3.0-rc1
On 01/27/2014 02:01 PM, Brad King wrote: > We're past the 2014-01-15 target date for CMake 3.0 on the issue > tracker roadmap so it is time to prepare the first release candidate. > I will now feature-freeze master in preparation for the release. Well it took a bit more work than I expected to update all the release infrastructure for the new documentation system, etc. Now we're pretty close to ready. There is one more change I'd like to make as part of the change to the 3.0 version number. I propose that we drop the fourth version component and use only two components for the feature level. The current three-component feature level arose for various historical reasons, but a two-component feature level is more consistent with the names of the components (since does not sound like a feature change). Through the 2.8.x release series we've used ..[.][-rc] = Release ...[-] = Development As part of the bump to version 3.0 I propose we change to .[.][-rc] = Release ..[-] = Development Post-3.0 development versions will be numbered 3.0.CCYYMMDD, e.g. 3.0.20140501 and post-3.0 bug (regression) fix releases will be numbered 3.0.N, e.g. 3.0.1 Future feature releases will then be numbered 3.1, 3.2, ..., 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, ... until an eventual 4.0. This is now possible because the CMAKE_VERSION variable and the if() VERSION_LESS/VERSION_EQUAL/VERSION_GREATER operators have been around for a long time and no one should use floating-point comparison against 3.x versions like they did long ago for 2.x. Comments? -Brad -- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
