Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] policy for the VERSION of init.d

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] policy for the VERSION of init.d
  • Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:55:58 +0200

On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 11:39:14AM +0200, Thomas Orgis wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
>
> It happened in the past that I worked on the init.d spell and it
> happened again recently (though I didn't push). I faintly remember a
> bit of discussion when I incremented the version number in DETAILS of
> the spell last time... also I see that hardly anyone besides me seems
> to think that VERSION in there is something that can actually change.
>
> So I want to have this cleared up once: What is the meaning of the
> VERSION of init.d?
> There is no upstream tarball or such, the spell _is_ the software. Thus
> I reckon that the version number should increment with any spell
> change... well at least with any change to the files that get installed.
> People seem to disagree? Or not care?
>
> So, any opinions (or already existing policy docs that I boldy did not
> read) on the VERSION and PATCHLEVEL handling in init.d and similar
> spells?
>
>
> Alrighty then,
>
> Thomas.
>
> PS: What is the meaning of the triplett 2.2.2 anyway? What is a
> major/minor change?

I've wondered about that myself :)
How about we just drop PATCHLEVEL and convert VERSION to a single
number? Makes it easy and understandable and doesn't change anything
functionally.
If no one objects, the next one to touch init.d should just pick a
number and put that into VERSION.

--
Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
http://www.sourcemage.org




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page