Open tueda opened 7 years ago
Hi Takahiro,
I would take the first version to minimize the amount of double information.
Jos
On 6 jul. 2017, at 18:13, Takahiro Ueda notifications@github.com wrote:
Just a small thing. I thought I imitated the version number of Jos's setup in the FORM output header, like
FORM 4.2 (Jul 6 2017, v4.2.0) 64-bits where the 4.2 is constructed from the major version and minor version, but actually I got
FORM 4.2.0 (Jul 6 2017, v4.2.0) 64-bits Run: Thu Jul 6 18:10:17 2017 (i.e., with an extra 0). It would be OK (except for some software that uses the printed version), but then a question arises: which will be preferred for the next version 4.2.1 in future:
FORM 4.2 (XX-XX-20XX, v4.2.1) 64-bits or
FORM 4.2.1 (XX-XX-20XX, v4.2.1) 64-bits ?
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/vermaseren/form/issues/213, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFLxEtAqWmvKWf3fT4l6AYKazM8ec8Nbks5sLQeRgaJpZM4OP3HO.
Hi Jos,
Yes, I also like FORM 4.2 (XX-XX-20XX, v4.2.1) 64-bits
.
"4.2" is the version that users can access by VERSION_
and SUBVERSION_
, while v4.2.1
is a bit internal one. Another option would be to make SUBSUBVERSION_
, but if our versioning is sane, 4.2.1 would contain only bug fixes and no new features.
Just a small thing. I thought I imitated the version number of Jos's setup in the FORM output header, like
where the
4.2
is constructed from the major version and minor version, but actually I got(i.e., with an extra
.0
). It would be OK (except for some software that uses the printed version), but then a question arises: which will be preferred for the next version 4.2.1 in future:or
?