Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BBE6DD37E for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:02:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 68138 invoked by uid 500); 26 Sep 2012 00:02:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 68109 invoked by uid 500); 26 Sep 2012 00:02:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 68101 invoked by uid 99); 26 Sep 2012 00:02:28 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:02:28 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.85.216.54] (HELO mail-qa0-f54.google.com) (209.85.216.54) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 00:02:23 +0000 Received: by qady23 with SMTP id y23so809075qad.6 for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:02:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=T0nlybxG/b4mmbeMpSi2Z23m6l+E0qxz6HnIRPnXOYk=; b=QnBmdvlIidXPU/Tu3ufPM4HeJSZfEoB8haKnOh7sjRMTWYW5hiz4Uma72wePZYm8+v 9jJzKxHVmM9TRJfxssmXU5Rdrv+l14wKFhDkFgotOnmskPNktZGwPSyvAwACGTzpkYf2 ok7kPUpsfG3v0hno94Ky4OlBZdoYiaUjMwBA0ynIRbEVNd+tg1lzvlwndj90Yp/79Fyc NxKLXoVWLlzIVLNV0eUwBtTQ5YrZK8mWCVDOxMHf/556GBYE7rFajeqvpzu2O2xJJuRE wztvMCVRr1j3p5bI/ZEvxln/eQsPcPQnGxV3T6oZPFzumSLzWkNVyOPBPocAnDekl6qK l3BA== Received: by 10.229.106.100 with SMTP id w36mr627510qco.109.1348617715812; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:01:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.49.64.164 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:01:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20120911180611.1611.5479@reviews.apache.org> <20120911235011.1601.78446@reviews.apache.org> From: David Nalley Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:01:35 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Review Request: Set correct version for database version check To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Cc: Hiroaki Kawai , edison su Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmdstEupSh1bSMWMK1A9IOvp28Q80PBQmTeTdxJNJZxyZ29ec9yUMcoQMjLedRfzE62feYj On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Noah Slater wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:25 AM, David Nalley wrote: > >> >> I agree - there are also practical problems from a packaging perspecting= . >> 4.0.0.5 is version 4.0.0.5 - but 4.0.0-5 is version 4.0.0 release 5. >> Plus we've agreed previously on a versioning strategy of n.y.z > > > You have to be exceptionally careful here. 4.0.0-5 is only "release" 5 if > you have voted on it. Perhaps you mean build 5? > Sorry - terminology disconnect here. In packaging, 'release' is considered: The release tag can be thought of as the package's version. The release is traditionally an integer =97 for example, when a specific piece of software at a particular version is first packaged, the release should be "1". If it is necessary to repackage that software at the same version, the release should be incremented. When a new version of the software becomes available, the release should drop back to "1" when it is first packaged. See: [1] http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-tags.html --David