[tahoe-dev] announcing pycryptopp v0.6.0.1206569328141510525648634803928199668821045408958

Scott Dial scott+tahoe-dev at scottdial.com
Sun Mar 18 19:06:02 UTC 2012

On 3/15/2012 12:20 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
> On 15/03/12 12:33, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> two (minor) bug reports:
>>   v0.6.0.1206569328141510525648634803928199668821045408958 is a
>>   ridiculous version number.
> I disagree. Refer to it as 0.6.0.* if you need a short name, but, for the
> purpose of a distutils/setuptools version, including a git hash in the
> version string has significant advantages.

At my work, we started using the git hashes in the version number for
untagged builds only. I think this is a good compromise. Additionally,
we use only the short hash (git log --pretty=%h), prefixed by the branch
name (even though that is redudant information, it aides communication
greatly). While the short hash can be ambiguous, it's not typically a
problem to disambiguate it given the context of the branch name and/or time.

For a tagged build, we pull the version identifier straight from the tag
name with no additional prefixes or suffixes, because they are redundant
and arguably harm communication. End-users will think they are expected
to recite that long version number because they don't understand where
it comes from. In the end, they won't even manage to tell you it was a
"0.6.0" release anymore because they just see the whole version number
as too complicated to remember and will just say "I downloaded it just
the other day, whatever version that is."

Scott Dial
scott at scottdial.com

More information about the tahoe-dev mailing list