[Geany-devel] geany on github; why not?

Colomban Wendling lists.ban at xxxxx
Thu Oct 6 20:55:32 UTC 2011

Le 06/10/2011 22:45, Enrico Tröger a écrit :
> On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:50:06 +0200, Colomban wrote:
>> Le 04/10/2011 23:37, Jiří Techet a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>> I'm trying to get everything ready for the conversion and there are
>>> still a few points unresolved:
>>>> I have a few comments (and questions) myself:
>>>> 1. Some branch names should be renamed (e.g. Geany-0_19_1) because
>>>> they have the same name as tags and they are ambiguous when doing
>>>> "git checkout". Some naming scheme for stable branches should be
>>>> invented.
>>> I was proposing to have two digit branches and three digit tags:
>>> Geany-0_19 - maintenance branch
>>> Geany-0_19_0 - tag
>>> Geany-0_19_1 - tag
>>> Geany-0_19_2 - tag
>>> Do you agree or do you prefer some different naming scheme?
>> I don't mind much, but it looks sensible since it quite follows current
>> scheme and is clear.  So yes, I agree.
> What about changing the underscore by a point to make the version
> number more familiar?
> I don't remember why I chose the underscore scheme but I know this
> decision is very, very old. Either it was back in the CVS days or early
> when migrating from CVS to SVN (this was in late 2005 or early 2006,
> IIRC). Either I was afraid using points could cause problems or I read
> somewhere (maybe SF docs) better to use underscores or I was just drunk.
> Since now, after the GIT merge all references would need to be adjusted
> at all or they simply die, I guess we can also change the names.

Makes sense, and actually I'd feel more natural by stripping the
"Geany-" prefix and replace underscores by dots, eg:

0.19 - maintenance branch for 0.19 (if any)
0.19.0 - first 0.19 release tag
0.19.1 - second 0.19 release tag
0.19.2 - etc.

Actually, I don't see the point of the "Geany-" -- we won't ever release
something else than Geany in Geany's repository, right?


More information about the Devel mailing list