 |
 |
2011/10/10 Brian Bockelman <[log in to unmask]>: > On Oct 10, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Lukasz Janyst wrote: >> 2011/10/10 Brian Bockelman <[log in to unmask]>: >>> We had one more in the pre-release series based on a git revision. We have the difference for continuity for testers. >>> >>> Actually, I think you guys are using the version/release wrong. The release is supposed to be reserved solely for the use of the packager, not the project. >>> >>> Each time you get a distinct set of code from the xrootd project, you want to bump the version number. Each time the packager makes a change to the packaging for the same code base, you bump the release number. This split allows xrootd.org to control one number and re-packagers to control another. >>> >>> Probably something worth cleaning up for 3.2. It's definitely maintainable right now, just a touch confusing. >> >> Hmm, I am not sure about that... This really depends on how you treat >> the release candidates: do they have a status of a release or is it >> just an insignificant preview? I would opt for the later. Nevertheless >> it's worth looking into, thanks for pointing this out. >> > > It's not the significance, it's "who is doing the change". If I, as a packager, select where to cut the "insignificant preview", it should go into the release. If you, as a part of the project, selects the ref (especially when it is tagged), it goes into the "version". > > Needless to say, this is not a hard and fast rule. But those of us downstream would sure appreciate this tweak. Yes, but in a sense I am also a packager, the border is blurry :) I see your problem though. Lukasz