Hi everyone,

 

After messing with revision number schemes in other projects, I've come
up with one I believe is preferable for a number of reasons. Here is the
scheme:

 

Revision numbers are of the form Major.Minor.Build.Revision. Major and
minor will reflect the corresponding Java version's major/minor numbers.
For example, the current release would start with 3.2. While in
development, the code slated to become 3.3 (say 3.3 beta 1) would start
with 3.3.

 

The build number will be incremented once each time a public build is
posted. When the major and/or minor number changes, this number resets
to zero. If I post two public builds with the same major/minor/build
numbers, it will cause extremely irritating problems with assembly
resolution and install processes for users, which leaves two choices:

 

1.       Keep this number in sync with the Java version. To do this, I
would post 1 public build for each publicly posted ANTLR release. No
previews/betas would be posted between times when the Java build number
increments.

2.       Let this number get out of sync with the Java version. This
means I can post previews/betas between the regular releases. This is
the scheme I lean towards.

 

At the time I build a public build, the revision number will always
reflect the source control changelist number containing the code I'm
building. The number increases over time and is never reset. The Windows
Installer does not look at the revision number when checking to see if
the current version of an application is already installed. In other
words, if you have 3.2.2.1000 installed and you try to install
3.2.2.1001 installed, it will inform you that you already have the same
or newer version installed and exit.

 

Sam

_______________________________________________
antlr-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-dev

Reply via email to