rtfeldman/node-test-runner

Improve version naming scheme

Closed this issue · 6 comments

andys8 commented

The -revX suffix could be confusing. Must suffixes like -beta are before the actual release without suffix. As an example: npm-check -u wants to upgrade 0.19.0-rev4 to 0.19.0.

image

Possible improvement

So maybe it is an option to use ${elm-version}.${rev} (e.g. 0.19.0.x) for future releases instead?

Comparing with hackage this wouldn't be the same way they propose the use it, but it could help clarify the order of versions - for humans and machines.

Side note

Similar issues are occuring for elm, where a 2.0.0 is released but deprecated.
dylang/npm-check#314

harrysarson commented

This would fit with what v8 does

  • 👍1
andys8 commented

Docs say the example 42.6.7.9.3-alpha is parsed as 42.6.7. So it looks like it could be not possible to have four figure version based on the documentation.

https://github.com/npm/node-semver/blob/master/README.md#usage

lydell commented

Wait what – 0.19.1 isn’t the latest version? Damn, I’m missing out on the latest and greatest in a couple of projects…

Also – it looks like you forgot to set the latest tag on the last release. When I do npm install elm-test in a new project I get 0.19.1-revision2, but 0.19.1-revision3 seems to have been released.

harrysarson commented

Maybe we should publish a new package elm-test-0.19.1 (if that is allowed). That package can follow normal semver. Then we publish elm-test-0.19.2 or elm-test-0.20.0 etc when the elm compiler updates?

lydell commented

I think this will be solved by following the suggestion in #447:

I think the conclusion is that we should keep the current versioning system, with one change: We should always have a -revisionX suffix. Currently it’s unclear if 0.19.1 or 0.19.1-revision4 is the latest. When Elm 0.19.2 or Elm 0.20.0 is released we should release 0.19.2-revision1 or 0.20.0-revision1 to avoid that confusion in the future.