ac-archive-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Policy: Versioning Macros In The Archive


From: Tom Howard
Subject: Re: Policy: Versioning Macros In The Archive
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 23:51:47 +1100

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Peter,

On 27/01/2005, at 11:07 PM, Peter Simons wrote:

Tom Howard writes:

Well, if I rewrite my macros (for whatever reason), I
would like to be able to indicate that via the version
number (e.g. bump it from 1.x to 2.0), to indicate a
major change. If they could then be release as a
development snapshot or release candidate, then even
better.

You can: Put the information into the documentation or into
the m4 source code.

@version is an internal field of the archive; it represents
the version of your macro _in the archive_, not the version
you assigned the macro. I have explained my rationale for
this decision in great detail already, my major point being
that other people may modify your macro too; therefore the
archive cannot rely on your version information to be
authoritative. Since the archive cannot denote minor or
major releases for your macro, it doesn't, but just states
the day of the last modification.

Sorry, it think I misunderstood you. From what I understand now, a macro can have two versions, the maintainers version, which goes in the documentation section and an ac-archive version which is specified with the @version tag. Is this correct? If so, we have no disagreement on this topic. :)

Cheers,

Tom Howard
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFB+OPkw1G4ZUM7KZoRAlVgAJkBY1BG6+chxqOHhbm9lh2D1lo4dACcDRY+
ZsLOfKkiBXe1DmjcnnFgH18=
=61bp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]