[MINC-users] MINC 2.0.13

[Andrew Janke]

> > I had thought that we were following libtool style versioning though?
> > (from what I can read of that page you mention) or am I missing
> > something? (likely).
>
> It's not enough to follow "libtool style" of versioning.  You must
> follow the entire procedure.  For each release, the releaser must look
> at the changes and decide whether any public interfaces have been
> added, removed, or changed.
>
> Even if nothing has changed, the REVISION must be incremented.  I note
> that this was not done from 2.0.13 --> 2.0.14, for example.  In fact,
> CVS shows the following history:
>
> 6.1          (stever   08-Jan-03): libminc_la_LDFLAGS = -version-info 0:0:0
> 6.11         (stever   14-Nov-03): libminc_la_LDFLAGS = -version-info 1:0:1
> 6.12         (bert     27-Apr-04): libminc2_la_LDFLAGS = -version-info 2:0:1
> 6.27         (claude   19-Apr-06): libminc2_la_LDFLAGS = -version-info 2:0:10
> 6.28         (claude   19-Apr-06): libminc2_la_LDFLAGS = -version-info 2:0:1

Ah, now I am with you.  OK from now on in you have my word that I will
also update the libtool flags just before release.  (2.0.15 will be
very very soon). Although given that one of MINC's goals is not to
change its interface without a very very good reason all we will see
are some very large REVISION numbers.

What would you suggest I use for the next release given the schmozzle above?

 2:1:1

?


-- 
Andrew Janke   (a.janke at gmail.com || http://a.janke.googlepages.com/)
Canberra->Australia    +61 (402) 700 883