Re: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] (Result) New database version numbering - xwiki-devs@xwiki.org

23 Sep 2011

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 18:04, Sergiu Dumitriu &lt;sergiu(a)xwiki.com&gt; wrote:

...
  On 09/16/2011 10:04 AM, Denis Gervalle wrote:
  Hi Devs,

 Last database migrator is very old now, it was on revision 15428 of our  SVN
  repository.
 The rules at that time was to use the revision number of the SVN commit  for
  the database version.
 So our database is currently in version 15428.

 Since we have no more revision number in Git, and that the database  version
  should be an integer, we need to vote a new
convention:

   A) continue from where we are, incrementing by one, so next version  will be
  15428

   B) use 16000, or another round number for next revision and increments  by
  one for next version

   C) use a mix with the current XWiki version, so next will be 32000, and  we
  have room for 1000 versions during the 3.2
releases. 
 D) Count the number of git commits on the trunk, with:

 git log --oneline | wc -l

 This would give a number equivalent to the SVN revision number.

Well, not really, it only follow a single branch of commits, while SVN
revision are global to a repository

...
   Personally,
since database changes are really rare, since we were already
 jumping, and since there is plenty of room for number,  I prefer meaning
 full number and I prefer C. The major advantage is that the number is in  the
  database, so if you have a db dump, you may
quickly know what is the  oldest
  version this dump is compatible with without
needing some reference list.

 So my +1 for C. 
 I prefer to use something more stable, and C) looks like the better
 option for me as well.

So we agree on C) with four +1, no 0, no -1

...

 --
 Sergiu Dumitriu
 http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
 _______________________________________________
 devs mailing list
 devs(a)xwiki.org
 http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

-- 
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO