PIM: Version alignment

[Ben Cooksley]

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Luigi Toscano
<luigi.toscano at tiscali.it> wrote:
> On Saturday, 17 September 2016 00:01:59 CEST Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 11:10 PM, Luigi Toscano
>>
>> <luigi.toscano at tiscali.it> wrote:
>> > On Friday, 16 September 2016 23:04:38 CEST Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Luigi Toscano
>> >>
>> >> <luigi.toscano at tiscali.it> wrote:
>> >> > On Friday, 16 September 2016 22:52:32 CEST Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> >> >> Hi all,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It seems that KDE PIM, despite being part of the Applications release,
>> >> >> doesn't align it's internal version numbers with the rest of the
>> >> >> Applications release.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This causes issues - as we've received complaints about various
>> >> >> products (all being PIM products) missing versions on bugs.kde.org,
>> >> >> due to this mismatch. It's also confusing for users.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Can PIM please fall in line with the rest of Applications?
>> >> >
>> >> > I don't think this is required: many pieces of Applications uses a
>> >> > different internal version. I'd really like to have this not enforced.
>> >>
>> >> I'd like to see it enforced.
>> >> See https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=335654#c7 for the confusion
>> >> created (and Sysadmin effort taken).
>> >
>> > I understand it takes effort, but I strongly disagree with the enforcing.
>> >
>> >> It also means that the process of releasing applications can't be
>> >> automated to create all the necessary versions, so someone has to do
>> >> it manually.
>> >> And chances are, it ain't going to be the application maintainer.
>> >
>> > The versions are defined in each repository; they can be extracted (by the
>> > CI, by some other script) and compared with the list of available version
>> > for each component. I.e. it can be automated even with different internal
>> > versions.
>> How would you version the tags in such a misaligned world?
>> At the moment it's very confusing as to what the version is - what the
>> Application says it is or what the general release umbrella says it
>> is.
>
> I don't see how it affects the tag. The tag is the global one for
> Applications, the internal version
> <application> --version or the about info shows the version.
>
>
>>
>> For that reason i'd very much like to see it harmonized.
>
> The problem here is to have an easy way to update the version data on
> bugzilla. I think that this can be automated.

Considering in some cases applications don't set it from CMake but
from a header or cpp file, i'd be wary of saying this can be
automated.
It could be automated fairly easily (using Riddell's code and a list
of appropriate products) if PIM projects all followed the same
universal version numbers.

>
> --
> Luigi

Regards,
Ben