search

cataclysm-mods / registry

A proposed game mod registry specification for the game Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
3 stars 2 forks source link

Defining cdda_version #4

Closed barsoosayque closed 4 years ago

barsoosayque commented 4 years ago

release[-build] is a de-facto standard for C:DDA versions, so it would be nice to use it in the cdda_version field as a more accurate way of defining the game version.

damien commented 4 years ago

Will be looking at this later today, but for the most part this matches what the CDDA devs told me in #1. I may have some copy edits for this PR before it gets merged, but overall it looks good! 🎉

barsoosayque commented 4 years ago

Can't believe I didn't check issues before making this PR. For mods, I'm not sure if COMMITS_SINCE is practical, and I honestly never seen it used in any Cata version. I assume this part of cdda_version can be safely omitted from the specs.

damien commented 4 years ago

@barsoosayque You are correct in that the numerical part of a git-ref is not equivalent to the build number. As mentioned in #1, we unfortunately can't assume build numbers will always be a reliable reference the the source code revision or version used within a build for a variety of reasons (change in build system, reprovisioning of the same build system without a backup of previous builds, etc). It's safest to just specify the desired revision via a Git ref, SHA, or tag, as that will always guarantee the desired version of the source code you're referencing.

That said, I'm still open to improvements in wording or clarity to what's already here. The only real restriction I'd put on changes aside from technical accuracy is that they try to follow an the RFC style guide (details here) as best they can.

I'll let you decide where you'd like to take this PR, but if you don't have other changes you'd like to include relating to versioning I'd suggest closing this one and opening up a new one for any other changes you'd like to see or make. đź‘Ť

damien commented 4 years ago

PS: Sorry for the slow response. Civil unrest in my area has been taking up a lot of my attention. Feel free to find my on Discord again if I'm not responsive.

barsoosayque commented 4 years ago

Yeah, fair enough. Although, I would image that is not very convenient for people to use git refs to specify the version. After all, git is not a common knowledge, however, luckily, there are tags for every experimental build, so it might be worth describing here how to link specific experimental version to the commit hash / tag. Do you think the specification is a good place to have such tips, or is it belong somewhere else ?

damien commented 4 years ago

@barsoosayque The spec is intended for a technical audience, mainly for folks writing software to manage mods or game devs on CDDA who determine how mod files are interpreted. This is a demographic that works with git pretty regularly, so I’m not too worried about explaining that. Furthermore, I think tool usage (git, JSON, editors, Github) are a bit beyond the scope of this project.

That said, I agree that documentation is important and that there are things we can and should do to help interested parties that wish to contribute.

As an example: If this spec does gain traction I believe we can solve the documentation problem you’re describing by updating the “how to make a mod” guides in the CDDA repo. :)