I stupidly was not paying attention during part of my changes and was in a detached HEAD state and merged the pull request back in. Once I realized this, I reverted master back to the change it was at.
I've opened a new pull request that people can look at https://github.com/openpgpjs/openpgpjs/pull/50 that includes the additional commit I was originally just going to fold into master that is a bugfix for: https://github.com/seancolyer/gmail-crypt/issues/12 Jim -- I think that's a reasonable approach. Do we have any suggestions on how we might delineate what are deemed to be major versions? So far we've pretty much dodged versioning all together. Sean On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Jim Klo <[email protected]> wrote: > The problem introduced however is that you cannot delineate between > versions between significant changes in design.. say you have to patch all > released versions with security fix (say you have a 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3)... > by using only a datestamp you don't know which architectural fork the code > base belongs from version number alone. > > I might suggest following a pattern that Node, Python, and several > others follow where you use: major.minor.rev where OpenPGP.js v0.1.20120730 > > This way you can have several versioned 'forks' and can easily > distinguish, ie: v0.2.20120730 from v0.1.20120730 > > - Jim > > * > Jim Klo > Senior Software Engineer > Center for Software Engineering > SRI International > * > * > t. @nsomnac > * > > On Jul 30, 2012, at 5:17 PM, Sean Colyer wrote: > > I've made a pull request to change the way we do versioning for our > builds. Basically replacing the hardcoded "OpenPGP.js v0.1" with a date > like "OpenPGP.js 20120730". > > I'm interested to see if others think this is a good idea, the project > has changed hugely since the original "0.1" and I think it makes a lot more > sense for us to have the version reflect which version of code is actually > running. However, please let me know if this doesn't seem like a good > approach? > > https://github.com/openpgpjs/openpgpjs/pull/49 > > Sean > _______________________________________________ > > http://openpgpjs.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > http://openpgpjs.org > >
_______________________________________________ http://openpgpjs.org
