On 09/16/2011 10:04 AM, Denis Gervalle wrote: > Hi Devs, > > Last database migrator is very old now, it was on revision 15428 of our SVN > repository. > The rules at that time was to use the revision number of the SVN commit for > the database version. > So our database is currently in version 15428. > > Since we have no more revision number in Git, and that the database version > should be an integer, we need to vote a new convention: > > A) continue from where we are, incrementing by one, so next version will be > 15428 > > B) use 16000, or another round number for next revision and increments by > one for next version > > C) use a mix with the current XWiki version, so next will be 32000, and we > have room for 1000 versions during the 3.2 releases.
D) Count the number of git commits on the trunk, with: git log --oneline | wc -l This would give a number equivalent to the SVN revision number. > Personally, since database changes are really rare, since we were already > jumping, and since there is plenty of room for number, I prefer meaning > full number and I prefer C. The major advantage is that the number is in the > database, so if you have a db dump, you may quickly know what is the oldest > version this dump is compatible with without needing some reference list. > > So my +1 for C. I prefer to use something more stable, and C) looks like the better option for me as well. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
