-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Version confusion #130
Comments
Blame @bradfordcondon :-) But yes, I agree that it's confusing and warrants discussion. |
very funny @scottcain The simple answer here is you're right: I should have started naming them as 1.31__01, 1.31__02 etc per your naming conventions. Up for debate if the script version should match the intended upcoming release or the latest release or what it looks like I did, which is the next sequential minor release. Buuuut..... Looking at the schema history it honestly looks to me like that release 1.31 is an implied current version is 1.31 which is equivalent to 1.3.1. Next minor release that we'll put the script in is Suggestion: why not use Semantic Versioning 2.0 for versioning This means (from those docs):
I also think picking a single dev branch, and minting a release by merging to master and creating a git tag so your github's release page update, is the way to go. Since you dont want the flyway versions to change, makes sense to me that you would do "upcoming next release" IE 1.3.3__ (or 1.33___, if you dont like semver), and then, when you mint 1.4 and someone wants to upgrade to it, they can use flyway which will auto run all scripts up to 1.4 . |
I'm finding the version numbers we attach to our Flyway migrations a bit confusing for these reasons:
1.3.3
but the current Chado version is1.31
. What is the final 3 for? Assuming it refers to the 3rd number in the Chado version, what happened to 2?1.3.3_XXX
number. So why the extra.3
if we are incrementing the_XXX
?1.4
branch. But technically if the version number is 1.3 shouldn't those be part of a 1.3x branch?Another now confusing issue is that previously, the third number in the Chado version was incremented if there were changes to the non-schema code. With PR #100, the non-schema code was moved out. So, now the reason for incrementing that last number is gone.
I think how we do versioning in Chado will need some discussion, but to help reduce confusion what if we stopped using the 1.4 branch and instead used a
1.3x
or1.3.x
branch? Then when we make a 1.4 release we move to the1.4.x
branch. Alternatively, we could just simply and make all changes in adev
branch.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: