On 4/16/11, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> Interesting naming scheme; is that something we should "document" in
> MCVersionName?

Yes, please

--Hannes

>
> Also, just to clarify our words, MC _does_ support branches in the
> domain, just not names for them.  But in terms of the ancestry, you
> can unlimited branching, which could be rendered if the tools were
> improved to do that..  Adding a name to something can often be done
> via external annotation, notwithstanding this naming scheme..
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Colin Putney <colin at wiresong.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Use some false initials that name the branch, and start its version
>>> numbers
>>> from e.g. 1.  So I name my open-source Cog versions VMMaker-oscog.N.  The
>>> package still has my initials as author.  David is using
>>> VMMaker-oscog.dtl.N, etc.
>>
>> Actually, MC does have some support for branching. If you use the
>> following convention, MC will do the "right" thing - group the
>> branched versions together in the UI, automatically suggest a version
>> name that's on a branch, and still allow you to merge between
>> branches. The naming convention is:
>>
>> <package>.<branch>-<initials>.<id>
>>
>> So if Eliot were using the standard convention, his versions would be
>> named like this:
>>
>> VMMaker.oscog-eem.147
>>
>> Colin
>>
>>
>
>