Re: [Xen-devel] (release) versioning

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 05/05/15 16:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
> All,
>
> on the hackathon we also discussed possibly changing the versioning
> of Xen. The main rationale for the proposal is that (just like in many
> other software projects) version numbers (in particular the major
> one) currently don't really convey much information. The proposal is
> to take gcc's new versioning scheme as a basis (i.e. I'm not going to
> claim that the below is an exact copy of theirs): Major releases
> always increment the major version number. Minor version 0 is
> reserved to the development cycle, i.e. the first release in any
> release series would be 5.1.0. RCs would be expressed through the
> 3rd digit, i.e. the first RC of the currently being worked on release
> would be 5.0.1 (there was some debate as to whether, despite
> being redundant, to attach -rc1 to it to make clear this is not an
> actual release).
>
> So comparing current and new schemes things would go
>
>       OLD                     NEW
>       4.6-unstable            5.0-unstable (or 5.0.0)
>       4.6.0-rc1                       5.0.1 (-rc1)
>       ...                     ...
>       4.6.0-rcN                       5.0.N (-rcN)
>       4.6.0                   5.1.0
>       4.6.1-rc1                       5.1.1 (-rc1)
>       ...                     ...
>       4.6.1                   5.2.0
>
> This additionally has the benefit that taking only the numeric
> part of the version string then would sort properly.
>
> Any comments or alternative proposals are welcome.

+1 (relayed from the hackathon)

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel