<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7652.24">
<TITLE>RE: [postgis-devel] autobuild cleanup - version revisited</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>That looks really cool, leaves no room for confusion, and makes us look really important.<BR>
<BR>
Although would<BR>
that cause problems with our build since we use that in the docs to infer<BR>
the tars and stuff (or we would continue using the rest of the version for that).<BR>
<BR>
Actually that's more along the lines of how SQL Server does it.<BR>
I'm running<BR>
<BR>
SQL Server 9.00.3042.00 (X64) <BR>
<BR>
In case anyone cares.<BR>
<BR>
I suspect that .3042 maps to some repository version number. I think those<BR>
extra 00s at the end denote whether you are running enterprise, standard or something.<BR>
<BR>
Wonder how oracle does it.<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: postgis-devel-bounces@postgis.refractions.net on behalf of Paul Ramsey<BR>
Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 1:49 PM<BR>
To: PostGIS Development Discussion<BR>
Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] autobuild cleanup - version revisited<BR>
<BR>
Let's get fancy and do $Id substitution :)<BR>
<BR>
1.4.svn-r21943<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Chris Hodgson<BR>
<chodgson@refractions.net> wrote:<BR>
> That doesn't solve the problem of being able to tell the difference between<BR>
> installs of 1.4.0 from svn and of the 1.4.0 release version, which I think<BR>
> is the major complaint we have about not having the svn or -dev suffix. I do<BR>
> like the suffix approach as opposed to re-using the micro version... since<BR>
> it's nice to be able to tell the difference between micro versions that were<BR>
> taken from svn, too.<BR>
><BR>
> Chris<BR>
><BR>
> Kevin Neufeld wrote:<BR>
>><BR>
>> Then, what if the 1.3 branch is tagged as 1.3.SVN and trunk is left as<BR>
>> 1.4.0<BR>
>><BR>
>> Paul Ramsey wrote:<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> I really can't recall. I think I might have just been aping mapserver,<BR>
>>> which simply increments its versions in trunk when releases are<BR>
>>> tagged, so that mapserver 5.4 already "exists", though only as trunk.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> P.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:49 AM, Obe, Regina <robe.dnd@cityofboston.gov><BR>
>>> wrote:<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Paul,<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Nudge Nudge - you have any opinion on this or do we have your blessing<BR>
>>>> to put the SVN back in the version numbers of 1.3.4 and 1.4.<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Will the sky fall? Do we just need to change POSTGIS_MICRO_VERSION or<BR>
>>>> are there other changes to prevent things from breaking?<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Thanks,<BR>
>>>> Regina<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> -----Original Message-----<BR>
>>>> From: postgis-devel-bounces@postgis.refractions.net<BR>
>>>> [<A HREF="mailto:postgis-devel-bounces@postgis.refractions.net">mailto:postgis-devel-bounces@postgis.refractions.net</A>] On Behalf Of Obe,<BR>
>>>> Regina<BR>
>>>> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 6:57 AM<BR>
>>>> To: PostGIS Development Discussion<BR>
>>>> Subject: RE: [postgis-devel] autobuild cleanup<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Mark,<BR>
>>>> Sorry for the long-windedness (I was hoping to rank higher on dramatic<BR>
>>>> effect :).<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Is it just the Version.config that controls that and would we put SVN as<BR>
>>>> part of the<BR>
>>>> POSTGIS_MICRO_VERSION. Although I vote to wait for Paul's opinion since<BR>
>>>> I assume he had some reason for doing that and perhaps have him do it.<BR>
>>>> Guess he doesn't get up until later in the day.<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Thanks,<BR>
>>>> Regina<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> -----Original Message-----<BR>
>>>> From: postgis-devel-bounces@postgis.refractions.net<BR>
>>>> [<A HREF="mailto:postgis-devel-bounces@postgis.refractions.net">mailto:postgis-devel-bounces@postgis.refractions.net</A>] On Behalf Of Mark<BR>
>>>> Cave-Ayland<BR>
>>>> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 5:46 AM<BR>
>>>> To: PostGIS Development Discussion<BR>
>>>> Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] autobuild cleanup<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Obe, Regina wrote:<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>>> Me too. Very important. While I think we should encourage users<BR>
>>>>> (somewhat) to test out and use 1.3.4 before released, I think its<BR>
>>>>> important they understand it is a moving (but somewhat stable target).<BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>> I think we should put the SVN back in the version 1.3.4 until actually<BR>
>>>>> released. It was annoying me a bit that I don't see it in my<BR>
>>>>> postgis_full_version() output and was worried what if I forget to<BR>
>>>>> upgrade to the new one (or compile against my old source) when it is<BR>
>>>>> released, how would I be able to tell the difference?<BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>> Thanks,<BR>
>>>>> Regina<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> I think that was exactly the point I was trying to make (but in a less<BR>
>>>> long-winded fashion!). Does anyone still have any objections to adding<BR>
>>>> the SVN suffix back into the SVN branches? If not, Regina, would you<BR>
>>>> like to add them back in?<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> ATB,<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Mark.<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> --<BR>
>>>> Mark Cave-Ayland<BR>
>>>> Sirius Corporation - The Open Source Experts<BR>
>>>> <A HREF="http://www.siriusit.co.uk">http://www.siriusit.co.uk</A><BR>
>>>> T: +44 870 608 0063<BR>
>>>> _______________________________________________<BR>
>>>> postgis-devel mailing list<BR>
>>>> postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net<BR>
>>>> <A HREF="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</A><BR>
>>>> -----------------------------------------<BR>
>>>> The substance of this message, including any attachments, may be<BR>
>>>> confidential, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure<BR>
>>>> pursuant to Massachusetts law. It is intended<BR>
>>>> solely for the addressee. If you received this in error, please<BR>
>>>> contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> _______________________________________________<BR>
>>>> postgis-devel mailing list<BR>
>>>> postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net<BR>
>>>> <A HREF="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</A><BR>
>>>> _______________________________________________<BR>
>>>> postgis-devel mailing list<BR>
>>>> postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net<BR>
>>>> <A HREF="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</A><BR>
>>>><BR>
>>> _______________________________________________<BR>
>>> postgis-devel mailing list<BR>
>>> postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net<BR>
>>> <A HREF="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</A><BR>
>><BR>
>> _______________________________________________<BR>
>> postgis-devel mailing list<BR>
>> postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net<BR>
>> <A HREF="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</A><BR>
><BR>
> _______________________________________________<BR>
> postgis-devel mailing list<BR>
> postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net<BR>
> <A HREF="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</A><BR>
><BR>
_______________________________________________<BR>
postgis-devel mailing list<BR>
postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net<BR>
<A HREF="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</A><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>