tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Armstrong <a...@tagish.com>
Subject Re: #define JK_VERSION in j-t-c (doesn't exist)
Date Thu, 21 Jun 2001 07:28:10 GMT
jean-frederic clere wrote:
> >
> > Decimal fields might be more appropriate to the ranges of numbers
> > expected, and I think Henri suggested an additional field for alpha,
> > beta etc.
> 
> I have VERISRELEASE to mark that it is a developement version, I am not sure we
> need the beta number. I would prefer to do it like httpd.
> But will this be ok?
> mod_jk/1.2.0-beta-01 (for the first beta)
> mod_jk/1.2.0 (for the release version).
> 
> >
> > How about
> >
> >   #define JK_DEV      0
> >   #define JK_ALPHA    1
> >   #define JK_BETA     2
> >   #define JK_RELEASE 99
> >   #define JK_MKVER(major, minor, sequence, type) \
> >     ((major) * 1000000 + (minor) * 10000 + (sequence) * 100 + (type))
> >
> >   #define JK_VERSION JK_MKVER(1, 2, 0, JK_DEV)
> What about:
> #ifdef RELEASE
> #define JK_VERSION JK_MKVER(1, 2, 0, 99)
> #else
> #define JK_VERSION JK_MKVER(1, 2, 0, JK_BETA)
> 
> Hex is a copy + paste from Linux sources. Dec is more easy? - No problem - But I
> like to  write 0x010200 and 0x110200 it is easy to see than 10200 and 110200.

Fine, +1 ;-)

-- 
Andy Armstrong, Tagish

Mime
View raw message