OK thanks for pointing that out. With the new cmake cut over we could move to a new version number, but all the users will be asking "what has changed".
So we could make a few tweaks (change GUI layout to fit net books, make 1600 the new default, hamlib stuff if it's ready) then bump the version number back onto the correct nomenclature. Cheers, David On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 14:22 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Mel Whitten <[email protected]> > wrote: > Richard, > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Richard Shaw > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 11:03 AM > Subject: [Freetel-codec2] CMake cutover: Remaining > issues > > > There's one in the root of the source tree and on in > src/. The one in src has the version set to 0.961 > which looks wrong to me. I'm assuming this should have > been 0.96.1. The one in the root only has 0.96. In > either case, one of these needs to go away, my vote is > to keep the on in the root. > > > 0.961 I believe is correct. The "1" (not .1 )was added > for the WIDE 1600 experimental mode. > > > The problem with that is you essentially changed the version number > by .865 (.961-.96) Which means you can no longer have a release of > 0.97 (or .98 or .99 or anything less <= .961) In order to do that it > should be 0.96.1 (patch level increment) or something like 0.97alpha > (or beta) to show it is a preview release. > > > This isn't just a philosophical issue either. Linux distributions rely > on sane versioning. For instance, for Fedora the breakdown is NEVR, > i.e.: > > > Name > Epoch > Version > Release > > > Name is obvious, but Epoch is used in cases where you need to force > the system to revert a bad update to a previous known good release (so > 1:0.96 would be considered newer than 0:0.97). Then the version as > described above, then the release number which is used when changes to > the packaging are needed but the upstream source has not changed. So > the proper fedora package would be something like this: > > > freedv-0.96-1 (NVR, as Epoch is assumed to be 0 if absent). > > > If I released a bad 0.97 package and needed to downgrade back to 0.96 > it would become: > > > freedv-1:0.96-1 > > > Hopefully I explained that well enough... So I guess the question is, > what is the next version going to be? If it's going to be 0.97 > (or .98, etc) then it must be moved to a patch level number or the > alpha/beta method used. > > > Thanks, > Richard > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt > New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service > that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your > browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic > and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_may > _______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_may _______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
