[Insight-developers] ITK version numbers (was: Bump CMakeLists.txt version to 4.1.0)

[Matt McCormick]

I will try CMake's approach, then.  That patch will need to be fixed
anyways -- it does not build.

Matt

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com> wrote:
> CMake's approach is even better.
>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Brad King <brad.king at kitware.com> wrote:
>> On 12/19/2011 1:13 PM, Bill Lorensen wrote at
>> http://review.source.kitware.com/3545:
>>>
>>> VTK has a nice feature for versioning. If the minor version is odd,
>>> the patch version is the kwsys generated date stamp.
>>
>>
>> ITK and VTK both have something along those lines:
>>
>>  http://itk.org/gitweb?p=ITK.git;a=blob;f=Modules/Core/Common/include/itkVersion.h;hb=v4.0.0#l40
>>  http://vtk.org/gitweb?p=VTK.git;a=blob;f=Common/vtkVersion.h;hb=v5.8.0#l31
>>
>> I don't remember actually using a date as the patch level in either project.
>>
>> CMake used to use the date as the patch level in development versions.
>> However it now uses the date as the fourth component so we don't actually
>> need an odd/even distinction.  The CMake version number is of the form:
>>
>>  major.minor.patch.<date|tweak>
>>
>> If the fourth component is less than 20000000 then it is a release and
>> otherwise it is a development version as of the given date (CCYYMMDD).
>> This has the advantage that if a feature is introduced on a given date
>> then someone that needs it can depend on the development version as of
>> that date as the minimum required version.  The next release will have
>> a version number larger than that because the major.minor.patch part
>> will be bigger.
>>
>> -Brad
>
>
>
> --
> Unpaid intern in BillsBasement at noware dot com