Establish toolchain and language versioning #4105
Conversation
chandlerc
added
proposal
chandlerc
changed the title
chandlerc
changed the title
github-actions
bot
added
proposal rfc
github-actions
bot
added
the
documentation
|
Ping. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good. While I have a few comments, they're mostly around the presentation rather than the rules; the only real non-cosmetic question is whether we still want the -0. in nightly and dev versions now that it's not necessary to get them to sort before -alpha and -beta.
| - `MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH-rc.N`: The N-th potentially viable candidate for a | ||
| release. | ||
| - `MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH-0.nightly.YYYY.MM.DD`: A nightly incremental | ||
| development build on a particular day during development of that | ||
| version. | ||
| - `MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH-0.dev`: An interactive, incremental development build | ||
| on a particular day by some developer during development of that | ||
| version. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Given that we don't have -alpha and -beta here, it seems that we don't need the -0. prefix to ensure that dev and nightly are ordered before rc. Would it make sense to remove the 0. part? (We could add it back in future if we add back alpha / beta.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm hesitant to do this... It seems nice to have nightly and dev be more explicitly separate categories from rc or anything else we have here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK. I don't have a strong opinion. And maybe relying on the coincidence that dev and nightly collate before rc is too "clever".
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
With this our infrastructure should match the final form of proposal #4105 that established our versioning scheme.
Proposal for how Carbon version numbers work:
Carbon
milestones
versions, and standardization