From: Christopher Currie (Christopher_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-27 10:27:57
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Up till now, I only bumped version number when doing V2 releases. The
> motivation was that for releases, the check is really necessary,
> while for persons who use CVS version, rebuilding jam after each CVS
> update is not a problem. If we bump version after adding each
> builtin, the version number will grow very quickly. Of course, other
> opinions are welcome.
While in theory I agree, it's no big deal most of the time, for folks
like me who like to help out but have limited time and can only keep
up-to-date as time permits, having that version updated saves me time of
debugging why my tests don't build anymore.
> Hmm, not sure what is better, to bump right after each release, or
> right before each release. I haven't done the version changes so I'll
> hold off on doing that now :-)
My personal preference is to bump right after each release. This
prevents someone from checking out CVS, building jam_src, and having it
report itself the same as a released version.
I think we should minic the gcc model, where the version is bumped and
set to X.Y.Z-alpha or something similar, right after release, and then
the alpha is dropped right before release. Or if you don't want to deal
with letters in the version number, we can imitate the linux model,
where odd numbers are development and even numbers are release, or
But I understand that it's a maintenance headache to do that, so if you
don't think it's worth the trouble, I completely understand.
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk