[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Groff] mom problems

From: Ralph Corderoy
Subject: Re: [Groff] mom problems
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 23:16:35 +0100

Hi Werner,

> > > No.  After a release I immediately increase the revision number.
> >
> > Oh, doesn't this mean anyone obtaining CVS will report 1.X when it
> > may be any CVS leading up to 1.X?  Perhaps adding `+CVS' or
> > something to the version string immediately after a release and then
> > replacing that with the next version number on the following release
> > would avoid the `where's 1.19.1' confusion.
> Normally, the next release is 1.20, except some severe bugs are found
> which make it necessary to release 1.19.1.

I'm not sure I've got my point across so forgive me for trying again.

If, immediately after tagging 1.N, the version file is modified to
contain 1.(N+1) then anyone running groff that has been built from CVS
between 1.N and the next release will report they're running groff
1.(N+1).  By the time they report to us, 1.(N+2) may have been released
so we'd be none the wiser that they're actually running some
non-specific version of CVS as opposed to the pucker 1.(N+1).

Having the version file contain 1.(N+1) only for the brief moment the
release is made and CVS tagged, and having it contain something
indicating `CVS du jour' for the rest of the time, would avoid this.  If
the file contained `1.N plus some CVS changes' then we'd have some idea
of what they were using.



reply via email to

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