Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] version-gen: fix versions

[Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> David Aguilar wrote:
>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Virtually all packaging guidelines would prefer 1.8.4~rc1, over
>>> 1.8.4.rc1 or 1.8.4-rc1, so it makes sense to use that instead.
>>>
>>> In particular, the only packaging we provide, git.spec, generates a
>>> wrong version, because git-1.8.4 < git-1.8.4.rc1, changing to ~rc1 fixes
>>> the problem as it's considered newer.
>
> A more conservative fix would be to tweak the .spec generation in the
> Makefile to follow whatever the appropriate Red Hat convention is.
> For example, something like this:

It's not Red Hat's convention, it's RPM, and dpkg, so basically every
package manager that most distributions out there use.

And I already sent a patch for that which was ignored:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/234794

> -- >8 --
> diff --git i/Makefile w/Makefile
> index 0f931a2..73bd89d 100644
> --- i/Makefile
> +++ w/Makefile
> @@ -2385,8 +2385,9 @@ quick-install-html:
>
>  ### Maintainer's dist rules
>
> +GIT_VERSION_RPM = $(subst -rc,~rc,$(GIT_VERSION))

That wouldn't work; VERSION doesn't have '-rc', it has '.rc'. and
what's the point of creating a new variable? It's a was of space.

>  git.spec: git.spec.in GIT-VERSION-FILE
> -       sed -e 's/@@VERSION@@/$(GIT_VERSION)/g' < $< > $@+
> +       sed -e 's/@@VERSION@@/$(GIT_VERSION_RPM)/g' < $< > $@+
>         mv $@+ $@
>
>  GIT_TARNAME = git-$(GIT_VERSION)
> -- 8< --
>
> That way, programs that parse the git version by splitting at '.'
> (there are more than a few, unfortunately) would continue to work,

Do you have any evidence that such programs exist? Specifically,
programs that work with 1.8.4.rc1, but not 1.8.4-rc1 or 1.8.4~rc1. I
find that very very very unlikely.

Anyway, in the very very very unlikely scenario that somebody's script
does break they can report that, and we can revert. What's the
problem?

> but
> the packaging system would get the benefit of the proposed versioning
> style change.
>
>>> The same happens in dpkg.
>
> Have you tested this?

% dpkg --compare-versions 1.8.4 gt 1.8.4~rc1 && echo yes || echo no
yes
 % dpkg --compare-versions 1.8.4 gt 1.8.4-rc1 && echo yes || echo no
no

> I thought the Debian packaging did not use the
> GIT-VERSION-GEN generated version in this way.

It doesn't matter. The name of the package would be git-1.8.4~rc1, and
'git --version' would return 1.8.4.rc1, that's inconsistent.

Why be inconsistent when we can be consistent?

> [...]
>> This seems related:
>>
>> http://lintian.debian.org/tags/rc-version-greater-than-expected-version.html
>
> If I understand correctly, that page has an exhaustive list of affected
> packages in the Debian archive and doesn't include git.

Because a) they don't package release candidates, and b) they use a
different version (s/\./~/).

-- 
Felipe Contreras