[sugar] Activity versioning schema

Gary C Martin gary at garycmartin.com
Tue Jul 15 23:28:07 EDT 2008


On 16 Jul 2008, at 00:03, Martin Langhoff wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Gary C Martin  
> <gary at garycmartin.com> wrote:
>> Version (activity_version) is just some sortable entity to be agreed
>
> Please do read back on this - now lenghty - discussion. Unfortunately,
> any monotonically increasing version does _not_ work, thanks to the
> magic of maintenance releases. Let us bow collectively to the wisdom
> of distro maintainers who are smart and have been doing this job for
> far longer than us.
>
> In other words, let us do the same thing that rpm and dpkg do.
>
> It gives you both more expressive power, and a stupid "1.1.0.9z is
> older than 2.0-alpha" cmp function for whenever you need it.

OK, sorry, I've clearly accidentally wandered in to a room full of  
hardcore gun toting bit heads – I'm now backing slowly towards the  
exit, my hands clearly raised. Please do be sure to post whatever (I'm  
sure excellent) final outcome is, clearly and somewhere public  
(perhaps http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activity_bundles *** would be a  
start), so us external activity developers don't have to be part of  
this bit punk talk.

*** Salient quotes: "Each activity.info file must have a  
"activity_version" key. The version is a single positive integer.  
Larger versions are considered "newer". The value assigned to this key  
should be considered opaque to the activity; the only requirement of  
the activity is that it must be larger for new activity builds." And:  
"Each activity.info file must have a "host_version" key. The version  
is a single positive integer. This specifies the version of the Sugar  
environment which the activity is compatible with. (fixme: need to  
specify sugar versions somewhere. Obviously we start with 1.)" ****

**** if this is incorrect, please, PLEASE (!!) remove it from the f$# 
%ing bit rot wiki!

--Gary




More information about the Devel mailing list