Le 11 févr. 2014 à 16:15, Norbert Hartl a écrit : > > Am 11.02.2014 um 14:48 schrieb Christophe Demarey > <christophe.dema...@inria.fr>: > >> Hi Norbert, >> >> Le 11 févr. 2014 à 11:05, Norbert Hartl a écrit : >> >>> I try really hard to move to 3.0 at the moment. To me versionner became >>> that important that this is a requirement for me to change the version. I’m >>> testing the bleeding edge version of versionner in 3.0 and this looks >>> really cool. But somehow I cannot create a development version of my >>> project. Whatever I try the only thing I can achieve is that versionner is >>> producing a new baseline method. I used all of the three buttons at the top >>> and did also examine all of the menus (those that work). >>> >>> Any hints? >> >> I wrote a small documentation on Versionner: >> http://chercheurs.lille.inria.fr/~demarey/Tech/Versionner. >> With Versionner, a development version is always a baseline. If none is >> found, it will create one from the selected version. >> Why is it a baseline? because you don't want to update your configuration >> each time you publish new packages. >> >> When you are ready to release, Versionner creates: >> a numbered version with fixed packages revisions, >> and the next development version (a baseline). >> >> Tell me if you need more information. > > I’m not sure I understand. On the symbolic version front we have bleedingEdge > that is loading a baseline without exact version information (it loads the > newest packages). Then we have development versions that have specific > package versions but are not released (not tagged stable). And we have > releases that have a sense of to-be-published. > Now we have only baselines/development and released versions?
Yes. It is quite strange to have three levels of stability. A few users use that and we tried to find a simple process to manage configurations. As in many other languages, you develop, release, then develop again. In another way, I can also understand that you prefer another process or that you need an "extra" level. > I liked to have the three levels because it matches all the requirements in > my workflow. That is baseline = development, development = be used by other > projects/collaborators before it is released, stable = ready to be released. your definition of the development version looks like a release-candidate. Why not publish (yes release ;) ) a RC version for this purpose? > Anyway if it is the case that there is only baseline and released version I > do not understand why the versions are having the blessing development. How > are those supposed to be tagged stable? They shouldn't. I fixed that friday and it will be integrated soon. > At the moment I find it quite confusing how it is. I need maybe one or two > more hints. I understand. Versionner was thought to encourage people to follow a workflow that may be different of their current one. But there is still place to discussion, move and adding some other functionalities. Versionner needs feedback and will evolve from feedback. Thanks, Christophe.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
