Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) > Development
what is the dev version now ?
(1/1)
afb:
What should the development version be called ? It's currently called "1.0svn####", maybe it should be updated to "8.0" for instance ? (i.e. release is "8.02", while nightly/snapshot is "8.0svn4925" for instance)
afb:
Also, this (version) should be autoconf'ed since it is currently hardcoded in at least 4 places.
--- Code: (update_revision.sh) --- echo "m4_define([SVN_REV], $REV)" > $REV_FILE
echo "m4_define([SVN_REVISION], 1.0svn$REV)" >> $REV_FILE
echo "m4_define([SVN_DATE], $LCD)" >> $REV_FILE
# Also change the revision number in debian/changelog for package versioning
mv debian/changelog debian/changelog.tmp
sed "1 s/(1.0svn[^-)]*/(1.0svn$REV/" < debian/changelog.tmp > debian/changelog
rm debian/changelog.tmp
--- End code ---
--- Code: (codeblocks.spec.in) ---%define _version 1.0_0.svn.%{_svnrev}
--- End code ---
--- Code: (codeblocks.plist.in) --- <key>CFBundleShortVersionString</key>
<string>1.0</string>
<key>CFBundleGetInfoString</key>
<string>CodeBlocks version 1.0 svn @REVISION@, (c) 2004-2008 Code::Blocks</string>
<key>CFBundleLongVersionString</key>
<string>1.0, (c) 2004-2008 Code::Blocks</string>
--- End code ---
thomas:
Good point... maybe we should just leave out the 1.0 and simply call it "svn 1234"?
Jenna:
--- Quote from: thomas on March 02, 2008, 06:21:37 pm ---Good point... maybe we should just leave out the 1.0 and simply call it "svn 1234"?
--- End quote ---
I think that's the way to handle it with the least work, even after coming releases.
afb:
--- Quote from: thomas on March 02, 2008, 06:21:37 pm ---Good point... maybe we should just leave out the 1.0 and simply call it "svn 1234"?
--- End quote ---
It needs a regular version*, though. And increasing from "1.0" to "8.0" seemed like
big enough of a jump, going to "4925" would probably be stretching it a bit... :-)
* for packaging and such, and looking somewhat the same like other software
Navigation
[0] Message Index
Go to full version