Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-sorcery - Re: [SM-Sorcery] Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy

sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Discussion of Sorcery related topics

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Dufflebunk <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>
  • To: Robin Cook <rcook AT wyrms.net>
  • Cc: sm-sorcery <sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org>, Grimoire <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Sorcery] Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy
  • Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 05:10:50 -0000

This seems to be the general feeling. Unless someone has some strong
objection, I will shelve this idea until such time as it looks to be
needed. Thank you all for your input.

On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 23:58, Robin Cook wrote:
> I think is this going to be a problem no matter what we do as we will
> get spells such as bar and gin where each depend on a different version
> of foo and will only work with that version. And someone is going to
> want both installed. I don't really see us having the man power to spend
> time making multiple versions of spells be installable at the same time
> that aren't that way already. Those that are capable of doing so can
> have different spells for them, though we might want to find a better
> way of naming them.
>
> CuZnDragon
> Robin Cook
>
> On Sat, 2003-06-21 at 14:25, Dufflebunk wrote:
> > It seems that as our spell base increases, we are starting to get more
> > more bugs due to version mismatches (doesn't look linear either). It may
> > be time to add support for versions in. I don't know how much impact
> > this will have on the spell format. Perhaps none for those who don't use
> > versions, or perhaps everyone will have to modify their spells. It
> > depends on exactly what is necessary. There are several questions whos
> > answers must be agreed upon before we start trying to put this in.
> > Before I list the questions that pop into my mind, I will explain the
> > main problem with adding version information. Versioning is not
> > standard.
> >
> > Let's say we have a spell Foo whos version is 1.3b, and another spell,
> > Bar that depends on Foo, version 1.3 or later. Is 1.3b after 1.3 or
> > before? Does the 'b' stand for Beta, or second? I can tell you that it
> > might be either. The grammar is inconsistent and depends on the project
> > (and even then projects change versioning systems (think mozilla's
> > milestones)). Testing for version equality is not a problem. The problem
> > is version ordering.
> > Any project using the simple Major.Minor.Patch system is easy. Any
> > using ReleaseDate is easy. The rest become problematic when attempting
> > to tell which system is being used.
> >
> > There are two solutions I can thing of:
> > a) Only a subset of all versioning system can be used for version
> > ordering (equality is not a problem), probably the standard (GNU?) and
> > date, or
> > b) Every spell that wants stuff to be able to depend on a version of
> > itself must include a file which has the versions, in order, that it has
> > gone through.
> >
> > Solution b is the simplest for the sorcery team. But a is easier for the
> > gurus and spell writers... I think... since spells that use stupid
> > versioning are crippled it might be harder.
> >
> > Now, onto the questions:
> > 1) Do we want more than one version of a spell in a grimoire? It would
> > be possible to put subdirectories in a spell, one per version supported.
> > The VERSIONSING file if that's the route we take would be int the top
> > spell directory.
> >
> > 2) Do we ever want the ability to have two versions of the same spell
> > installed? If yes, how would this fit with the work being done on
> > INSTALL_ROOT?
> >
> > 3) Would version based depends be required?
> >
> > I set up polls in the forums in the sorcery section. I would prefer that
> > as a medium if you have alternative suggestions. Please vote.
> > http://forums.sourcemage.org/viewforum.php?f=9
> >
> > And remember, this is a crosspost. You may just want to use the forum
> > for small comments.
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Sorcery mailing list
> SM-Sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-sorcery
--


Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
-----------------
PGP public key at
http://wwwkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3327A9A5
F1






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page