Open Maxelweb opened 2 years ago
I would suggest to change semver from REAL-MAJOR
.?
.?
.?
.REAL-MINOR
.WANNABE-MINOR
.?
.INCREMENTAL-RANDOM-NUMBER
- to REAL-MAJOR
.?
.?
.?
.REAL-MINOR
.WANNABE-MINOR
.?
.RANDOM-FUNNY-NUMBER
-
I would suggest to change semver from
REAL-MAJOR
.?
.?
.?
.REAL-MINOR
.WANNABE-MINOR
.?
.INCREMENTAL-RANDOM-NUMBER
- toREAL-MAJOR
.?
.?
.?
.REAL-MINOR
.WANNABE-MINOR
.?
.RANDOM-FUNNY-NUMBER
-
We need to find what else to write in place of "?"
REAL-MAJOR
.16-DIGITS-ON-THE-FRONT
.EXPIRATION-MONTH
.EXPIRATION-YEAR
.REAL-MINOR
.WANNABE-MINOR
.THREE-DIGITS-ON-THE-BACK
.RANDOM-FUNNY-NUMBER
-
Could this work?
i think that all these proposals show a worrying lack of security by obfuscation, which is the best kind of security. I suggest calculating the sha512 of each value in the version string:
sha512(REAL-MAJOR).sha512(16-DIGITS-ON-THE-FRONT).sha512(EXPIRATION-MONTH).sha512(EXPIRATION-YEAR).sha512(REAL-MINOR).sha512(WANNABE-MINOR).sha512(THREE-DIGITS-ON-THE-BACK).sha512(RANDOM-FUNNY-NUMBER)-
also, each sha should be space-separated, not dot-separated, to improve readability:
sha512(REAL-MAJOR) sha512(16-DIGITS-ON-THE-FRONT) sha512(EXPIRATION-MONTH) sha512(EXPIRATION-YEAR) sha512(REAL-MINOR) sha512(WANNABE-MINOR) sha512(THREE-DIGITS-ON-THE-BACK) sha512(RANDOM-FUNNY-NUMBER)-
REAL-MAJOR
.16-DIGITS-ON-THE-FRONT
.EXPIRATION-MONTH
.EXPIRATION-YEAR
.REAL-MINOR
.WANNABE-MINOR
.THREE-DIGITS-ON-THE-BACK
.RANDOM-FUNNY-NUMBER
-Could this work?
Ok, i just generate one let's use this:
Type | Digits |
---|---|
16-DIGITS-ON-THE-FRONT | 5527232020091726 |
EXPIRATION-MONTH | 5 |
EXPIRATION-YEAR | 2026 |
THREE-DIGITS-ON-THE-BACK | 369 |
i think that all these proposals show a worrying lack of security by obfuscation, which is the best kind of security. I suggest calculating the sha512 of each value in the version string:
sha512(REAL-MAJOR).sha512(16-DIGITS-ON-THE-FRONT).sha512(EXPIRATION-MONTH).sha512(EXPIRATION-YEAR).sha512(REAL-MINOR).sha512(WANNABE-MINOR).sha512(THREE-DIGITS-ON-THE-BACK).sha512(RANDOM-FUNNY-NUMBER)-
also, each sha should be space-separated, not dot-separated, to improve readability:
sha512(REAL-MAJOR) sha512(16-DIGITS-ON-THE-FRONT) sha512(EXPIRATION-MONTH) sha512(EXPIRATION-YEAR) sha512(REAL-MINOR) sha512(WANNABE-MINOR) sha512(THREE-DIGITS-ON-THE-BACK) sha512(RANDOM-FUNNY-NUMBER)-
No, then its too long. Let's follow the KISS rule. I can suggest to use SHA1 instead, but since semcurity is not our first priority, I would kindly suggest to not use any possible non-digits character.
So, our current version should be fixed to this: v0.5527232020091726.5.2026.0.1.369.69
Next minor version should be something like: v0.5527232020091726.5.2026.1.2.369.420
lmao gg wp
On Sat, Feb 5, 2022, 21:53 Mariano Sciacco @.***> wrote:
So, our current version should be fixed to this: v0.5527232020091726.5.2026.0.1.369.69 Next minor version should be something like: v0.5527232020091726.5.2026.1.2.369.420
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/beeb89gang/TheMemeProject/issues/4#issuecomment-1030696977, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIFX6CVAEZ7W2KW5SBQ5FNDUZWE3RANCNFSM5NQAA27Q . You are receiving this because you were assigned.Message ID: @.***>
hi
opening again the discussion
we will have
version 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.69 then 0.0.0.0.0.0.6.9 then 0.0.0.0.0.0.69.0 and so on
What happen next? There will be new 6s and 9s coming? Maybe 420 for RC? 0.0.0.0.0.0.69.0 -> 0.0.0.0.0.0.69.6 -> 0.0.0.0.0.0.420.0 -> 0.0.0.0.0.0.420.6 -> 0.0.0.0.0.0.420.9 -> 0.0.0.0.0.6.0.0 Or is it like: 0.0.0.0.0.0.69.0 -> 0.0.0.0.0.0.69.6 -> 0.0.0.0.0.0.69.9 -> 0.0.0.0.0.6.0.0 -> 0.0.0.0.0.6.0.9 -> 0.0.0.0.0.6.9.0 -> 0.0.0.0.0.69.0.0 -> ... ? Beause having just what you propose is too little for versioning ie. 0.0.0.0.0.0.6.9 -> 0.0.0.0.0.0.69.0 -> 0.0.0.0.0.6.9.0 -> 0.0.0.0.0.69.0.0 -> ...
Normal Semver is referenced here: https://semver.org/
Since normal semver is ehw, let's do one for us.
REAL-MAJOR
.?
.?
.?
.REAL-MINOR
.WANNABE-MINOR
.?
.INCREMENTAL-RANDOM-NUMBER
-E.g.
v0.0.0.0.0.0.0.69
Any suggestions? @erclu