On 4 January 2017 at 11:09, René J.V. Bertin <rjvber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday January 4 2017 10:45:39 Dag wrote: > > >We have now released 3.0.0.1. Next should probably be 3.0.1. > >So I gather current should be an alpha: > >Major: 3 > >Minor: 0 > >Release: 89 > Hi All, Maybe the logic (where I contributed) in CMakeLists.txt that counts the versions/soversions/etc. assumes a x.y.z scheme only and not x.y.z.v. I don't think it's a bad thing. 3.0.0.1 is only a CALLIGRA_VERSION_STRING. Numerically our version is 3.0.0. So next stable would be 3.0.1 and "alpha 3.1.0 unstable" is 3.0.89 - it's probably the time to update CMakeLists.txt in master to it. But I can't spot the calligra/3.0 branch which shall be set to 3.0.0 version... > > > >But then we would go backwards to Release: 1 when releasing, > >and after that we go to Release: 89 again and we can't see > >what 3.0.89 actually means as it will crop up for every new 3.0 release. > >Is it just me being confused, or... > > No, that's something that's been confusing me in other projects too. > > FWIW, KDevelop 5.1 will be released soon, up from 5.0.3 . Their current > version (in CMakeLists.txt and the git tag) is 5.0.80. Who knows, maybe > that'll become 5.0.99 for the gold release candidate whatever version. > > So what would be wrong with 3.0.0.89? Conveys clearly enough the message > that it's not just a patch release, and that it's closer to 3.0.1 than to > 3.0.0 . > > R. > -- regards, Jaroslaw Staniek KDE: : A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators : and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org Calligra Suite: : A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org Kexi: : A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi Qt Certified Specialist: : http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek
