[postgis-devel] Objects versioning

[Chris Hodgson]

Sounds good to me as well, I'm just hoping that the version gets copied 
into each of those places from one config file somewhere, using 
configure or autogen or some other manner of automated substitution?

Beyond that I'm +1.

Chris

On 12-02-24 06:32 AM, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> I can live with it, I'm pretty sure.
> +1
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Sandro Santilli<strk at keybit.net>  wrote:
>> I think it is time to simplify and improve robustness of versioning.
>>
>> The current situation is weak in that there's no version stored/checked
>> inside the raster library nor in the raster or topology scripts.
>> Also the current version stored/checked for core lib/scripts isn't
>> necessarely correct because it relies on SVN keyword substitution
>> performed on the main file and thus doesn't catch modifications
>> happening in included files. Not to mention that under git-svn
>> the keyword substitution doesn't happen...
>>
>> I've created a ticket for this:
>> http://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/1608
>>
>> But it's probably better to discuss on the list first.
>> My proposal is as follows:
>>
>>   1) PostGIS has a single version for all components.
>>     Such version is Major.Minor.Micro plus an optional
>>     revision number (for SVN snapshots)
>>
>>   2) The PostGIS single version should be stored in all
>>     libraries (core,raster) and user-facing scripts
>>     (postigs.sql, rtpostgis.sql, topology.sql).
>>
>>   3) Each script should expose function to report
>>     the version it embeds. Scripts bound to libraries
>>     should also expose a function to report the version
>>     of the bound library (core, raster).
>>
>>   4) The postgis_full_version() should check for the
>>     version reported by all the functions as being equal
>>     or suggest appropriate action to fix any discrepancy.
>>
>> The worst case I can see with this approach is that people are
>> requested to run the "upgrade_minor" script more often than
>> otherwise needed, but I see absolutely no harm in doing that,
>> as long as our "upgrade_minor" scripts are working.
>>
>> I'd like to get this done before beta, so please cast your votes !
>> Thank you.
>>
>> --strk;
>>
>>   ,------o-.
>>   |   __/  |    Delivering high quality PostGIS 2.0 !
>>   |  / 2.0 |    http://strk.keybit.net - http://vizzuality.com
>>   `-o------'
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> postgis-devel mailing list
>> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
>> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel