[NTG-pdftex] Version numbering

Taco Hoekwater taco at elvenkind.com
Wed Jun 8 14:15:06 CEST 2005

I'm happy with Martin's original proposal, that, afaik, doesn't break
anything. \pdftexversion will move like this:

130 140 150 160 170 180 190 (all A.BB), then 200 210 (A.B.C)
and perhaps 211 if a bugfix release is needed. Right, Martin?

Taco

Martin Schröder wrote:
> On 2005-06-08 09:05:41 +0200, Heiko Oberdiek wrote:
>
>>  Thus I think, it is quite too late to change this interface.
>
>
> No change is needed; currently \pdftexrevision is a char with
> alphanums, in the future it will be a char with digits. This
> shouldn't break anything.
>
> Do we really need the information of \pdftexrevision as a number?
> It would be nice, but is it needed?
>
>
>>* Suggestion for interface that respects compatibility
>>  and adds an interface for three numbers:
>>
>>  A.B.C
>>  A \in [1..\infty]
>>  B \in [0..99]
>>  C \in [0..25]
>>
>>  The whole version number is printed as: printf("%d.%d.%d", A, B, C)
>>
>>  \pdftexmainversion:   readonly integer for A
>>  \pdftexsubversion:    readonly integer for B
>>  \pdftexbugfixversion: readonly integer for C
>>
>>  \pdftexversion := \pdftexmainversion * 100 + \pdftexsubversion
>>  \pdftexrevision := to_lowerletter(\pdftexbugfixversion)
>
>
> Why?
>
> [...]
>
>
>>Thus we have already A, B, and C. What we really need is rather
>>a specification:
>>* data type: A, B, C are numbers (/strings), range
>
>
>     A \in [1..\infty]
>     B \in [0..99]
>     C in "0".."9" (currently it's "a".."z"
>
> B is only increased by 10.
>
>
>>* how does the version look like, formatting issues
>
>
> A.BB.C
>
>
>>and the definition of semantics:
>>* meaning of A, B, C
>
>
> A and B have no meaning for themselves; together they are the
> current version. C is the patchlevel.
>
>
>>* when to increase A, B, or C
>
>
> C is increased only for bug fixing releases.
>
> A.B is increased by 0.1 by every release with new features.
>
> Best regards
>     Martin