Hi Stijn, all, On 13 June 2014 11:55, Stijn De Weirdt <[email protected]> wrote: > i'm not saying that the versioning couldn't reflect something better, like > the ictce toolchain could be called intel-<icc major>.arbitrary .garbage or > something like that, but i'm usnsure a module versioing will fix the real > issue.
What's the "real issue"? My issue with that current versioning scheme is that it is completely opaque, so I have to read the `.eb` file for the toolchain to find out what exactly is in `goolf-1.4.10` ... I do agree that printing out the version numbers of tools in `module show $toolchain` will go a long way, though. > it would be better that site admins symlink a set of toolchain+version to > something human readable for the users Then each site will have its own naming/versioning scheme, and we are just duplicating each others' work. We'll end up there anyway if we cannot agree on a "good enough" (there's no "perfect" here) compromise, but let's try... >>>> How could you possible 'encode' 5-6 different software versions into a >>>> single (sensible) version number without losing information? >>> >>> I think we can all quickly agree that we can't: >> >> +1 >> >> I would also add: do we really *need* lossless encoding here? > > yes we do. Why? Ciao, R -- Riccardo Murri http://www.gc3.uzh.ch/people/rm Grid Computing Competence Centre University of Zurich Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Zürich (Switzerland) Tel: +41 44 635 4222 Fax: +41 44 635 6888
