[U-Boot-Users] RFC: U-Boot version numbering

[Ben Warren]

Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Aug 1, 2008, at 10:32 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
>   
>> Hello,
>>
>> I would like to get your general opinion about  changing  the  U-Boot
>> version numbering scheme.
>>
>> To be honest, I never really understood myself how this  is  supposed
>> to work and if the next version should be 1.3.4 or 1.4.0 or 2.0.0, i.
>> e.  which  changes  / additions are important enough to increment the
>> PATCHLEVEL or even VERSION number.
>>
>> I therefor suggest to drop this style of version numbering and change
>> to a timestamp based version  number  system  which  has  been  quite
>> successfully  used  by  other  projects  (like  Ubuntu)  or  is under
>> discussion (for Linux).
>>
>> My suggestion for the new version numbers is as follows:
>>
>> VERSION = 1	(at least for the time being)
>>
>> PATCHLEVEL = current year - 2000
>>
>> SUBLEVEL = current month
>>
>> Both PATCHLEVEL and SUBLEVEL shall always be 2 digits (at  least  for
>> the  next 91+ years to come) so listings for example on an FTP server
>> shall be in a sane sorting order.
>>
>> If we accept this system, the next release which probably comes out
>> in October 2008 would be v1.08.10, and assuming the one after that
>> comes out in January 2009 would be named v1.09.01
>>     
>
> If we go to date based versions.  I'd prefer we keep year as 4 digits:
>
> v1.2008.10
> v1.2009.01
>
> It just seems easier to me at a visual level when I look at try and  
> compare versions.
>
> - k
>   
I vote for this one, but starting at v2.

regards,
Ben