Thanks for the explanation, Chris.

I was thinking on using some of the eliot versions with my own builds, like this: 2222.01, and maybe unix/windows guys could do the same, so we need a prefix, something like 2222.M01 for mac, U01 for unix, W01 for windows... ... or something like that. Anyway... this discussion borns in pharo list, but concerns more to vm-dev list. I'm copying email there :)

cheers, Esteban

El 21/12/2011, a las 9:28p.m., Chris Cunningham escribió:

On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Esteban Lorenzano estebanlm@gmail.com wrote:

...

Hi,

and yes, I know what you feel about version numbers... we (guys working with vm) should find an unique versioning number. But is hard, right now we have this different numbering:

1. Eliot has his own version number (I think based on svn commit version)
2. Each platform (Linux, Windows and Mac) has his own versioning too.
3. There are also 4.x versions alive (for mac, at least)

I also don't know what does each version means (3.8 for unix, etc.). I named cocoa versions 6.x because older versions based on carbon where 5.x, so I thought: changing from carbon to cocoa is important enough to have a new major version... but I dunno.

The old numbering system came from pre-Pharo days, when the VM was just for Squeak. In those days, the VM number was meant to sync with the current Squeak image release - so vm 3.8 for Unix was the VM that accompanied the Squeak 3.8 release, compiled for the Unix platform. Each platform (and, indeed, each variant - such as Cocoa/Carbon) would use the same main version number, but with some other distinction built on (and these did change by platform).

Eliot's VM now supports a wide range of roughly compatible Smalltalks (or near smalltalks), such as Pharo, Squeak, Croquet, Cuis, Newspeak, and probably others. In that environment, with each near-smalltalk having their own numbering schemes, the old numbering convention just doesn't make sense. So, his using the apparent SVN commit number makes as much sense as anything - probably a lot more than some.

As for what you should call the Pharo branded and tweaked versions, that is obviously up to you. I would suggest finding something that makes it easy for us users to figure out which version of the PharoVM works with which Pharo image, if possible.

-Chris