[development] Module developers, please do *proper* releases !
xavier.bestel at free.fr
Mon Feb 18 15:09:25 UTC 2008
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 09:51 -0500, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel at free.fr>:
> > So ?
> > Ready when ready, I agree with that. But two successive versions should
> > be called 5.x-1.(n) and 5.x-1.(n+1), with (n) and (n+1) being actual
> > numbers, not 5.x-1.x-dev and 5.x-1.x-dev.
> You must not understand what -dev is. It is a rolling bundle tied to
> CVS. So when CVS updates so does the -dev version. It is labeled -dev
> to indicate that it is for developers to help develop the module. It
> is labled 1.x to indicate that the minor version number isn't set yet.
> Once the release is made a version is created based on CVS tags as
> assigned by the module maintainer.
I understand. But there are *many* modules that don't have any stable
release, they are available through -dev only. So basically the commit
*is* the release, and that sucks.
> > Look at the video module for example: not a single 5.x stable release,
> > it went through numerous versions, all called 5.x-1.x-dev.
> > If you don't use the update module, you're screwed.
> If you use -dev in your systems for production then you probably
> screwed up. You need to make sure you test it in your test environment.
Thank you. When I have 3 options:
- use a non-working module
- use a working module, but with only a -dev version
- roll my own module by hand
You think me choosing option 2 is a screwup. So what should I do ?
More information about the development