andy at athame.co.uk
Fri Dec 27 14:57:59 GMT 2002
On Friday 27 December 2002 16:21, Stephan Kulow wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 26. Dezember 2002 22:31, Ryan Cumming wrote:
> > On December 26, 2002 12:17, Dirk Mueller wrote:
> > > On Don, 26 Dez 2002, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
> > > > kdelibs/kdecore/kdeversion.h in HEAD defines KDE_VERSION to be
> > > > "319". Shouldn't this be "3190"?
> > >
> > > No, because that would be bigger than 320.
> > But not bigger than 3200. I thought it was already determined that
> > the switch to larger version numbers is fully backwards and
> > forwards-compatible.
> I'm quite confused too. I thought we leared from this 305/306
> desaster, that we use >3 digits now. I would like to follow Qt's way
> to 0x030190 because it would be larger than any version before and we
> had a way to enlarge it at our own space (and have 89 versions to go
> for 3.1.x :)
Anything that avoids a recurrence of the 305/306 problem would be good.
I guess it doesn't really matter which way we go, but it should be
decided sooner rather than later.
Of course, the Qt way would allow us to have more than 10 variations in
the 3.x branch too, although if we ever want to release KDE 3.24.48 I
think we have bigger problems to worry about ;)
Andy Fawcett | andy at athame.co.uk
| tap at kde.org
"In an open world without walls and fences, | tap at lspace.org
we wouldn't need Windows and Gates." -- anon | tap at fruitsalad.org
More information about the kde-core-devel