On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 20:15 +0200, Sven Panne wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 13. Mai 2009 19:28:45 schrieb Johan Tibell:
I think Duncan meant that we first choose the policy and then adjust the version numbering scheme of HP to match.
Hmmm, perhaps I'm a bit slow today, but I don't understand this: What the PvP on the Wiki describes is more or less numbering folklore, with the only exception that we use two places for the major number instead of one, which is more common. Following the principle of least surprise, I therefore consider the PvP as "carved in stone". The HP is just another package, so what can be adjusted?
Sorry, I don't think I explained it well (and my other reply had a questionable standard of English). The thing that can be adjusted is the version scheme for the Haskell Platform. The current scheme is described here: http://trac.haskell.org/haskell-platform/wiki/VersionNumbers But this is not set in stone. If we decide that we only want to allow bug fixes in minor releases and that we do want the platform to follow the PVP then we would have to adjust the above scheme, see: http://trac.haskell.org/haskell-platform/wiki/VersionNumbers#Alternatives which says: It has been suggested that the platform version numbers follow the PVP in the sense that the platform is the union of all it's components. In this case, if we agreed that there are no API changes in minor releases then the general scheme would be $year . $major-release . 0 . $minor-version That is, the 3rd digit would always be zero. This would be because major releases typically have some slight incompatible change in at least one package while minor releases do not change any API at all, only fix bugs, so only the 4th digit changes. Duncan