Re: Can't get a patch through because of weekly development releases.

[Carl Sorensen]

On 7/15/10 12:54 PM, "Graham Percival" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 07:15:38PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 09:24:05AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I think that David's idea has some promise now.  Create a new branch, with
>>>> a
>>>> version that's unique to this branch.
>>> 
>>> \version "9.999.9"  ?
>> 
>> How is that unique to a particular branch?
> 
> Simply because we're never going to have version 9.999.9 ?  I
> mean, even when we start development for lilypond 10, we're never
> going to have 999 releases between lilypond 8 and 10.  We could
> use 9.999.9 as a convention for "not a real version number".
> 
> Yes, it's not as safe as adding letters to the version number, but
> OTOH I'm pretty certain that we could use 9.999.9 without any
> build-system-related problems.  (hmm... actually, it's just
> possible that it wouldn't be happy with the leading 2.  But
> something like 2.999.9 should be totally safe)

As a developer, I'm free to choose whatever I want.  The special version is
only in my custom git branch and in patch reviews on Rietveld.  Once it gets
pushed, it's got a real version number.

Thanks,

Carl