You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to p-dev@xerces.apache.org by "Jason E. Stewart" <ja...@openinformatics.com> on 2001/10/29 05:05:13 UTC
Version Numbering
Hey all,
LET YOUR VOICES BE HEARD!!!
I think the current version numbering scheme is confusing. Originally,
Xerces-C used only:
MAJOR.MINOR => 1.5
And so I was free to do all I wanted with subversions. It was clear
that XML-Xerces 1.5.0, 1.5.1, 1.5.2, etc all belonged to Xerces-C
1.5.
But then the Xerces-C folks started using subversion numbers:
MAJOR.MINOR.SUBVERSION => 1.5.1
Now It's impossible to tell what version of XML-Xerces goes with what
version of Xerces-C.
I think that the only way to clear this up is for XML-Xerces to begin
using sub-subversion numbers.
I have two ideas:
* use straight monotonically increasing numbering:
1.5.1-1, 1.5.1-2, 1.5.1-3, etc
* use dates in YYYYMMDD format
1.5.1-20010915, 1.5.1-20011012, 1.5.1-20011121, etc
Also, I prefer that dash to separate the Xerces-C version from the
XML-Xerces version.
LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK!
Cheers,
jas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Version Numbering
Posted by Terje Bless <li...@pobox.com>.
On Tue, 2001-10-30 at 02:14, Jason E. Stewart wrote:
> In principle I agree. The difference here is that the relationship of
> Xerces-C to XML::Xerces is not just a simple dependancy, it's a matter
> of two sister projects.
Not from where I'm sitting. From here it's just a simple dependancy. You
may also wish to consider just how much pain you're willing to inflict
on yourself in getting the version numbers to make sense. :-)
> Having a related version numbering scheme really helps.
Why?
> > BTW, am I the only one getting messages in triplicate from this list
> > nowadays?
>
> I'm not. Anyone else?
ISTR someone mention duplicates were a GNU Mailman bug?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Version Numbering
Posted by "Jason E. Stewart" <ja...@openinformatics.com>.
"Terje Bless" <li...@pobox.com> writes:
> On Mon, 2001-10-29 at 05:05, Jason E. Stewart wrote:
>
> > And so I was free to do all I wanted with subversions. It was clear
> > that XML-Xerces 1.5.0, 1.5.1, 1.5.2, etc all belonged to Xerces-C
> > 1.5. But then the Xerces-C folks started using subversion numbers:
> >
> > MAJOR.MINOR.SUBVERSION => 1.5.1
> >
> > Now It's impossible to tell what version of XML-Xerces goes with what
> > version of Xerces-C. [...]
> >
> > LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK!
>
> I think that you're trying too hard... :-)
Could be true ;-)
> If a particular version of XML::Xerces requires a particular version
> of Xerces-C, then _document_ it. Plain and simple. No need to futz
> about with weird versioning schemes; they cause more problems and
> confusion then they are worth. Just put the necessary version of
> Xerces-C prominently in README and INSTALL and use the version
> numbers as they were meant to be used -- and as CS-101 should teach
> -- to denote major, minor, and bugfix revisions. Dependencies are a
> completely separate problem and should be treated as
> such. Shoehorning the one to serve the needs of the other can only
> lead to much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
In principle I agree. The difference here is that the relationship of
Xerces-C to XML::Xerces is not just a simple dependancy, it's a matter
of two sister projects.
I remember the days when the Tcl and Tk version numbers were
completely off from one another -- Tcl was at 7.1 and Tk was at
4.2. Nowadays when a new version is released they are released
together and the numbers are incremented so they are constantly in
sync.
Having a related version numbering scheme really helps.
XML::Xerces is inherently dependant on Xerces-C, the versions should
match.
*AND* I should document which version it is dependant on.
> BTW, am I the only one getting messages in triplicate from this list
> nowadays?
I'm not. Anyone else?
jas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Version Numbering
Posted by Terje Bless <li...@pobox.com>.
On Mon, 2001-10-29 at 05:05, Jason E. Stewart wrote:
> And so I was free to do all I wanted with subversions. It was clear
> that XML-Xerces 1.5.0, 1.5.1, 1.5.2, etc all belonged to Xerces-C
> 1.5. But then the Xerces-C folks started using subversion numbers:
>
> MAJOR.MINOR.SUBVERSION => 1.5.1
>
> Now It's impossible to tell what version of XML-Xerces goes with what
> version of Xerces-C. [...]
>
> LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK!
I think that you're trying too hard... :-)
If a particular version of XML::Xerces requires a particular version of
Xerces-C, then _document_ it. Plain and simple. No need to futz about
with weird versioning schemes; they cause more problems and confusion
then they are worth. Just put the necessary version of Xerces-C
prominently in README and INSTALL and use the version numbers as they
were meant to be used -- and as CS-101 should teach -- to denote major,
minor, and bugfix revisions. Dependencies are a completely separate
problem and should be treated as such. Shoehorning the one to serve the
needs of the other can only lead to much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
BTW, am I the only one getting messages in triplicate from this list
nowadays?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-help@xml.apache.org