From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Version strings for VCS snapshots
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 18:30:28 +0200
Message-ID: <87twqpkq8r.fsf_-_@gnu.org>
References: <8761377ct3.fsf@elephly.net>
	<20150919121718.1eeccc11@openmailbox.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52223)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1ZdhVa-0005OS-AP
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Sep 2015 12:30:35 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1ZdhVX-0007kq-2x
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Sep 2015 12:30:34 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20150919121718.1eeccc11@openmailbox.org> (Eric Bavier's message
	of "Sat, 19 Sep 2015 12:17:18 -0500")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Eric Bavier <ericbavier@openmailbox.org>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

Eric Bavier <ericbavier@openmailbox.org> skribis:

> I realize we have no guidelines in the manual concerning the version
> field for git checkouts, but I wonder whether we should, as it comes up
> a bit.  Several existing packages use (string-append "1.2.3." commit),
> where "1.2.3" is the version of the corresponding source.  One other
> package uses the (string-append "1.2.3-c" commit) method, and another
> uses (string-append "1.2.3-" commit.  I personally prefer the "-"
> notation, since it distinguishes the commit hash from the version
> number (does it confuse any internal logic that assumes a package
> version number is the last component of the store path following a
> dash?).  In this case, the "-c" seems confusing because the commit hash
> itself begins with a 'c'.
>
> I recall some discussion previously about how it would be nice for
> git-checkout package versions to still "sort" nicely.

I think the goal should be to ensure lexicographic ordering, such that
=E2=80=98guix package --upgrade=E2=80=99 DTRT.

In practice, that means the (string-append "1.2.3." commit) should be
avoided.

Instead we should use (string-append "1.2.3." REV "." commit) where REV
would be an integer we manually increment every time we upgrade to a
newer snapshot.

I don=E2=80=99t think adding =E2=80=9C-=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9C-c=E2=80=9D be=
fore the commit is useful, but I
don=E2=80=99t have a strong opinion.

WDYT?

Ludo=E2=80=99.