On Oct 3, 2006, at 10:56 PM, Dries Buytaert wrote:
On 10/3/06, Derek Wright <drupal@dwwright.net> wrote:
i think we're pretty much decided on that naming convention (-- as the delimiter between the core API branch and the contrib module's major revision number)
I'm OK with that, if things are set in stone.
well, that's the question... at the talk i gave at drupalcon (http:// drupal.org/node/86694), everyone hated using an underscore '_' for this. e.g.: "DRUPAL-4-7_1" as the 1st development branch compatible with 4.7.x, and "DRUPAL-4-7_1-0" as the 4.7.x-1.0 release tag there were a few alternatives proposed during the discussion for a different delimiter than '_', such as '-V-', '-R-', '-REV-', etc. at barcamp, when i had a chance to speak to dries about it, he suggested (and i like) just using '--'. so, here are the viable contenders for branch and tag names: 1) "DRUPAL-4-7--1" and "DRUPAL-4-7--1-0" 2) "DRUPAL-4-7-V-1" and "DRUPAL-4-7-V-1-0" 3) "DRUPAL-4-7-R-1" and "DRUPAL-4-7-R-1-0" 4) "DRUPAL-4-7-REV-1" and "DRUPAL-4-7-REV-1-0" 5) "DRUPAL-4-7_1" and "DRUPAL-4-7_1-0" (just for comparison, this isn't a contender) this is your last chance to object to #1 being what we use. if anyone strongly protests (with a better suggestion), please speak up now or forever hold your peace. i don't want any sniveling complaints about this in 3 weeks when it's all live and you have to start using it, since it'll be too late to change at that point. thanks, -derek p.s. aside from this detail about the delimiter, for a pretty thorough but concise summary of how the new release system will work, you should read the 1-page handout i passed out at the druaplcon talk: http://drupal.org/files/new_release.pdf again, speak now, or love every bit of it and forever shut-up about your complaints. ;) <span class="dww-anal"> p.p.s. it doesn't *really* matter, but if a module's version number is "4.7.x-1.0", the "4.7.x" part is clearly the API-compatibility version. the "0" is obviously the patch level. what should we call the "1"? is that the major revision or the minor revision? in my email quoted above, i called it "major", but does it make more sense to refer to this as the "minor" revision, and think of the API- compatibility stuff as the "major" revision? just curious what folks think, if anyone else actually cares about this. ;) </span>