RFC: should we remind people to upgrade?
Matt Mackall
mpm at selenic.com
Fri Dec 28 21:17:32 UTC 2012
On Fri, 2012-12-28 at 14:24 +0100, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 23. Dezember 2012, 14:31:32 schrieb Matt Mackall:
> > Here's one way to do that:
> >
> > - check the timestamp on __version__.py
> > - if > 6 months, report in 'hg version' and tracebacks
> >
> > $ touch -d "dec 1 2011" mercurial/__version__.py
> > $ hg version
> > Mercurial Distributed SCM (version 2.4.1+64-1c0dfd5f1357+20121222)
> > please upgrade!
> > (see http://mercurial.selenic.com for more information)
> >
> > Copyright (C) 2005-2012 Matt Mackall and others
> > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There
> > is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
> > PURPOSE.
>
> I don’t like relying on the timestamp. There are too many ways that it could
> change without affecting mercurial in any other way.
That's actually fine as this is simply an advisory heuristic. People's
clocks can also be off by decades; also not a problem.
But keying off the version number is fine.. until we decide to change
the release scheme. We will eventually do that, simply due to project
maturity. I envision us hitting that point in another 3-5 years. It
might be better to just build a timestamp into __version__.py; my first
version did just that.
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
More information about the Mercurial-devel
mailing list