[Insight-developers] ITK version numbers

[Bill Lorensen]

Brad,

What would be best for itk: vtk's or cmake's approach?

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Brad King <brad.king at kitware.com> wrote:
> On 12/19/2011 1:31 PM, Bill Lorensen wrote:
>>
>> VTK's is different. VTK in vtkGenerateVTKConfig.cmake has the magic to
>> create a VTKConfig.cmake that uses the kwsys time stamp.
>
>
> Right, I was thinking only of the version header files.  I forgot about
> my VTK change for this:
>
>  http://vtk.org/gitweb?p=VTK.git;a=commitdiff;h=19852427
>
> On 12/19/2011 1:31 PM, Bill Lorensen wrote:
>>
>> CMake's approach is even better.
>
>
> Thanks.  The only reason CMake uses 4 components is because we regularly
> release new features in versions that increase only the "patch" number.
> The approach works equally well for 3-component versions:
>
>  major.minor.<patch|date>
>
> or any number of components so long as the date is in a component deeper
> than the one updated for new features.  When that component is a date
> it means development.  When the component is a small integer it is a
> maintenance release (the initial release being number 0).
>
> Of course the "date" in a development version is meaningful only along
> one branch of development e.g. "master".  In a world of non-linear
> development paths (Git) a granular feature-availability test actually
> needs the history graph to be available for a reach-ability test.
>
> -Brad



-- 
Unpaid intern in BillsBasement at noware dot com