[asdf-devel] Re: ASDF 3.0.2.1 released

[Raymond Toy]

>>>>> "Robert" == Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> writes:

    Robert> Raymond Toy wrote:
    >>>>>>> "Robert" == Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> writes:
    >> 
    Robert> Raymond Toy wrote:
    >> >> If this is the first release candidate, can you explain the difference
    >> >> between this and the 3.0.2 that was released a month or so ago?  I'm a
    >> >> bit confused now on the numbering.
    >> 
    Robert> I have been assuming that the numbering is:
    >> 
    Robert> x.y.z
    >> 
    Robert> x = major revision -- I do not expect to preside over one of these!
    Robert> ASDF 2 was a major clean-up.  ASDF 3 added substantial improvements in
    Robert> dependency tracking, etc.
    >> 
    Robert> y = change to API
    >> 
    Robert> z = patch release
    >> 
    Robert> This is what is enshrined in the ASDF versioning predicates, so I
    Robert> figured I would stick with that.
    >> 
    >> Thanks.  Previously, I think cmucl only updated on x.y, ignoring z.
    >> But with asdf 3, I think we updated on x.y.z (3.0.2, in particular).
    >> 
    >> I was just wondering now when cmucl should update its copy of asdf.
    >> And in particular should cmucl take 3.0.2.1?  I have not run into any
    >> issues with 3.0.2, but I only use a small number of asdf systems.

    Robert> Implementations should *not* update on tags like 3.0.2.1.

    Robert> I will *try* to make this clear by not setting the "release" tag to
    Robert> point to them.  E.g., the current release tag still points to 3.0.2.

Thanks for clarifying this. I'll refrain from updating unless there's
a "release".  BTW, what is this "release" tag?  Is it in git?  If not,
that would be nice to have, because right now, I just see a bunch of
numerical tags corresponding to the version (and various upstream and
debian tags).

Ray