Alexandria version in ASD file

[Michał "phoe" Herda]

I'd like to note that this ".0.dev" versioning scheme was AFAIK *never*
used to create more than *one* version of Alexandria.

With all due respect to the author of the versioning system, I consider
the current system to be a bug rather than a feature if it prevents
anyone, including Alexandria maintainers itself, from finding out what
the current version of Alexandria is and what the next version of
Alexandria should be.

I agree with Fare.

~phoe


On 15.08.2017 04:40, Faré wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Attila Lendvai <attila at lendvai.name> wrote:
>>> The ASD file for Alexandria mentions that is has version "0.0.0", which
>> […] the versioning is not
>> that trivial. Nikodemus has come up with a versioning scheme where the
>> package is also called :alexandria.0.dev with an :alexandria nickname.
>>
>> i'm not sure what exactly was the plan, and whether it's written up
>> somewhere, so i'll not jump into just overwriting the :version field
>> in the .asd.
>>
>> is there anyone who remembers/knows?
>>
>> if not, then any suggestions what the next version should be in the
>> .asd, and what to do with the package?
>>
> May I suggest that this package naming scheme is bullshit and that no
> one uses it, nor is anyone susceptible of using it in the near or far
> future?
>
> Until someone comes up with actual usage patterns (or, better,
> functions and macros) to use this kind of package versioning, it's
> better to get rid of it.
>
> However, getting rid of it is not something to do lightly, so what
> about increasing the asdf version to 0.1.0, then 0.1.1 at next
> "release", etc., and go to 0.2.0 whenever some less than "compatible"
> API change is done, etc.
>
> —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
> Whatever says the law, it is only ever forbidden but to get caught.