Re: [Nix-dev] RFC: NixOS version string format
On 1 May 2014 14:47, Peter Simons sim...@cryp.to wrote: Hi Bjørn, Now that I've switched to the NixOS 14.04 release I see nixos-version printing 14.04.42698.54a7d1d (Baboon). It is impossible to tell if that is close to release date or hundreds of commits later... well, is the number of commits that have happened after the release date a particularly meaningful information? Suppose that number is 18. What does that tell you? Why is it important? Hm, that was actually a bit difficult question to answer :-) I think the reason I want this is the same reason we have version numbers in the first place; because it's easier for humans (me!) to use/remember. Knowing that it's 18 commits after 14.04 is easier to relate to than that it's 42698 commits since the very beginning. Also, the current scheme looks a lot like MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, but it doesn't act like it: PATCH is never reset to zero, unlike other projects I've seen. So it feels a bit odd to me. (Personal opinion, I agree!) We could of course have used a master branch and stable1/2/3 with no tags/release numbers at all, and rely on git to find some meaning behind commit id version numbers. But I guess we all agree that *that's* not a good idea! Also, if we switch to a git describe like version number (*and* have git annotated tags for releases), git describe in nixpkgs would be much more meaningful. Made up example from an alternative (near future?) nixos world: $ nixos-version 14.04-18-gabcd1234 $ cd nixpkgs $ git describe 14.04-20-gdefg5678 # Ah, my checkout is two commits ahead! Compare with current situation: $ nixos-version 14.04.42698.54a7d1d (Baboon) $ cd nixpkgs $ git describe fatal: No annotated tags can describe 'e4690a7a79153ce3d8989fb442c1f0f5ef534b44'. However, there were unannotated tags: try --tags. Ok, so my checkout is at e4690a7a79153ce3d8989fb442c1f0f5ef534b44 and nixos is at 54a7d1d. Fire up git to see where that is, and whether it's a single commit difference or hundreds of commits... Best regards, Bjørn Forsman ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] RFC: NixOS version string format
Hi, On 01/05/14 15:15, Bjørn Forsman wrote: I think the reason I want this is the same reason we have version numbers in the first place; because it's easier for humans (me!) to use/remember. Knowing that it's 18 commits after 14.04 is easier to relate to than that it's 42698 commits since the very beginning. Also, the current scheme looks a lot like MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, but it doesn't act like it: PATCH is never reset to zero, unlike other projects I've seen. So it feels a bit odd to me. (Personal opinion, I agree!) I agree that having the number of commits since the start of the branch is nicer. I've just made a change that does this. The only problem is that it causes the version number in the 14.04 branch to jump backwards this once, but since we're not using it for anything automated, it shouldn't be a big problem. Made up example from an alternative (near future?) nixos world: $ nixos-version 14.04-18-gabcd1234 $ cd nixpkgs $ git describe 14.04-20-gdefg5678 # Ah, my checkout is two commits ahead! That's assuming you're on the 14.04 branch. If you're on master, and 14.04 is the nearest tag, it will say something similar, but it will be misleading because they're not the same commits. -- Eelco Dolstra | LogicBlox, Inc. | http://nixos.org/~eelco/ ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] RFC: NixOS version string format
On 1 May 2014 16:58, Bjørn Forsman bjorn.fors...@gmail.com wrote: On 1 May 2014 16:19, Kirill Elagin kirela...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Bjørn Forsman bjorn.fors...@gmail.com wrote: To complicate further, if the release tag is made on the release branch and is not reachable from master, I don't think git describe on master will find that tag at all. Sure, but there are normally no commits in the release branch (before actual release) that are not in master, so it should be safe to merge the branches. We can just require this merge right after creating the release [annotated] tag during the release procedure. Yes, it should be safe. 1. git tag -a -m Release 14.04 v14.04 release-14.04~N # Adjust N to match nixos-version output on stable channel, https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/21e8cfac80c6c0ccac87ec8947d895fae485b7da 2. git checkout master 3. git merge release-14.04 To be precise, it should be git merge v14.04. That is, merge the tag, not the branch. The branch may have additional commits after the tag that we do not want. Best regards, Bjørn Forsman ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-dev] RFC: NixOS version string format
Hi all, For a long time I've felt that the NixOS version string format VERSION pre NUM_COMMITS_SINCE_THE_VERY_BEGINNING is a bit odd. It feels like a MAJOR.MINOR.PATH format, but PATCH is every increasing. I personally would prefer the number of commits number to be start over each time the version number is bumped. IMHO, that would make it easier to reason about which version you're on. I think such a version number format would also match nicely with what git describe would print if/when we have proper annotated git tags for releases (we should!). Thoughts? Best regards, Bjørn Forsman ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] RFC: NixOS version string format
We're using git, thus the only really meaningfull thing is the hash .. But its hard to compare which is more or less up to date. Thus maybe its worth thiking about adding the hash if it is not included. The hash also identifies the history. Marc Weber ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] RFC: NixOS version string format
The hash is already included in nixos-version. On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Marc Weber marco-owe...@gmx.de wrote: We're using git, thus the only really meaningfull thing is the hash .. But its hard to compare which is more or less up to date. Thus maybe its worth thiking about adding the hash if it is not included. The hash also identifies the history. Marc Weber ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev -- www.debian.org - The Universal Operating System ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] RFC: NixOS version string format
+1 for annotated tags and `git describe`. It will also include a hash. Plus some additional useful information. This way we automagically get beautiful names for releases and useful names (with last tag and commit hash) for intermediate versions. Upcoming 14.04 release might be a good point to start creating annotated tags, right? -- Кирилл Елагин On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Luca Bruno lethalma...@gmail.com wrote: The hash is already included in nixos-version. On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Marc Weber marco-owe...@gmx.de wrote: We're using git, thus the only really meaningfull thing is the hash .. But its hard to compare which is more or less up to date. Thus maybe its worth thiking about adding the hash if it is not included. The hash also identifies the history. Marc Weber ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev -- www.debian.org - The Universal Operating System ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] RFC: NixOS version string format
On 04/27/2014 12:00 PM, Bjørn Forsman wrote: For a long time I've felt that the NixOS version string format VERSION pre NUM_COMMITS_SINCE_THE_VERY_BEGINNING Perhaps I don't understand what you mean. nixos-version for me prints 14.04pre- + git-hash BTW, the number of commits since 14.04 does give a better intuition than hash by itself, but IMO the actual commit date seems even better (and it's supposed to be monotonous, too). Vlada smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] RFC: NixOS version string format
On 27 April 2014 16:54, Vladimír Čunát vcu...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/27/2014 12:00 PM, Bjørn Forsman wrote: For a long time I've felt that the NixOS version string format VERSION pre NUM_COMMITS_SINCE_THE_VERY_BEGINNING Perhaps I don't understand what you mean. nixos-version for me prints 14.04pre- + git-hash Yes, sorry, I didn't mention the hash for some reason. I guess I thought it was a good idea to leave it out of the discussion because it's not something I want to change. Like Marc Weber says above, when using git/distributed system, the hash is the only true identifier. I agree with that. To clear things up: * nixos-version currently adds the git-hash at the very end and I don't want to change that * git describe also adds a hash at the end to provide unique identifier (iff the commit isn't exactly on a tag) Best regards, Bjørn Forsman ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
