Versioning of Frameworks

[Mario Fux]

Am Dienstag, 05. Mai 2015, 13.46:16 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:

Morning

[snip]

> > If master is always releasable, you should indeed only merge into master
> > with a change of a version number.
> > If you don't want to maintain different versions for whatever reason
> > (and I think that's an entirely reasonable choice),
> > you can continue to automate this version bump. As long as I can exclude
> > my library from the automatic version bumping,
> > I see no problem at all. Having an automatic version bump as a
> > requirement to be a framework is the problem IMO.
> 
> ok, I start to understand what you want to get: two different ways of
> releasing frameworks. I think that's a very bad idea for obvious reasons I
> hope I do not have to bring up here.

Ok, they are not that obvious too me. Wouldn't it be possible to add something 
like maintainerManagesVersionOnItsOn=false to a file in all the frameworks 
(isn't there already a file in each frameworks for stuff like platforms, 
etc.?) and modify the release-scripts (David or anybody who knows these 
scripts) once so that these scripts check this variable.

So if it's set to false and most current maintainer seem to prefer not to do 
version bumps on their own the release scripts would bump the version number 
and do all the stuff as they do now. If the variable was set to true these 
scripts wouldn't bump the version numbers and just use the version numbers as 
set by the maintainer?

Or is this just naive thinking from my side that it's "that easy"?

> So far I assumed that you want to change the way how *all* frameworks are
> released which would imply a significant work load to the maintainers as
> you just explained yourself.

As I understood it Christian doesn't want it changed for all maintainers as 
that would almost be rude ;-).

griits
Mario