On 19/09/2015 18:12, Stefan wrote:
On 19/09/2015 16:58, Evgeny Kotkov wrote:
Stefan Hett <luke1...@gmx.de> writes:
You are absolutely right here and I should have seen that before.
Didn't
take that (obvious) point into account at all.
I'll come-up with a working version scheme which won't have
potential for
causing this misinterpretation and will make sure that the next
releases
will use that other scheme.
Think the solution will either be to restart my own version
numbering which
is completely independent from SVN's or go with the alternative you
presented.
Thank you :)
So I'm going to stick with the current version numbering layout (since
that's the easiest IMO) but will shift all the version numbers and
rely on the naming of the download files and the changelog to point
out which SVN version builds are based on.
Some examples:
1.7.22.1 -> 1.0.22.1
1.7.22.2 -> 1.0.22.2
1.9.1.1 -> 1.2.1.1 (filename suffixed with -dev-rXXXXX)
1.9.1.2 -> 1.2.1.2
1.10.0.1 -> 1.3.0.1 (filename suffixed with -dev-rXXXXX)
That way there should not be any risk that builds are mistaken for not
yet released SVN versions, everything still works out with the current
MaxSVN build plan and it still preserves the ideas from Bert/Ivan to
add pointers to revision numbers/dev-build-markers in the distribution
files.
For reference: The change of the version numbering scheme is tracked in
MaxSVN's bugtracker under: http://www.luke1410.de:8090/browse/MAXSVN-11
Regards,
Stefan
