From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Taylan Kammer Subject: Re: Better names for Guix versions from git? Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2018 22:30:11 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87lg4dwfmt.fsf@gmail.com> <351d14fe-0edd-6575-939d-981598b65255@riseup.net> <87k1jw8jyp.fsf@fastmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49950) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gcdEY-0003Bm-PQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 16:30:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gcdEX-0005RG-2Q for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 16:30:26 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-x229.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::229]:36322) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gcdEW-0005QG-C6 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 16:30:24 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-x229.google.com with SMTP id x23so16037758oix.3 for ; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 13:30:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87k1jw8jyp.fsf@fastmail.com> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Marius Bakke Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org I like dates in "rolling release" version strings because they immediately tell you how old/new the version is, but I can certainly live with that format too. Definitely better than what we have. - Taylan On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 3:02 PM Marius Bakke wrote: > > swedebugia writes: > > > On 2018-12-25 20:49, Taylan Kammer wrote: > >> Currently, after running 'guix pull', the Guix version will be reported > >> by 'guix --version' as something like: > >> > >> 522d1b87bc88dd459ade51b1ee0545937da8d3b5 > >> > >> I think it would be really nice if instead it were something like: > >> > >> 2018-12-25-522d1b > >> > >> where the date is the commit's date (year, month, day) in UTC+0. > >> > >> That's shorter, more descriptive, and just as unique. (The chances of > >> there being two commits in the same day with the same first 6 positions > >> in the hash should be negligient.) > >> > >> The package name is currently something like: > >> > >> guix-522d1b87b > >> > >> That could become: > >> > >> guix-2018-12-25-522d1b > >> > >> which is a bit longer but more descriptive. > >> > >> I looked into guix/self.scm a bit but couldn't easily tell how difficult > >> it would be to implement these changes. > >> > >> Thoughts? Worth it? > > > > I think it is worth it, in fact I was on my way to suggest the same. > > I like the "git describe" format: > > $ git describe > v0.16.0-414-ge99d036828 > > It does not mention a date, but it can be copy-pasted into "git" and > shows how many commits there were between each generation.