[dpdk-dev,v2,1/2] version: switch to year/month version numbers

  From: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>

As discussed on list, switch numbering scheme to be based on year/month.
Release 2.3 then becomes 16.04.

    Ref: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-December/030336.html

Also, added zero padding to the month so that it appear as 16.04 and
not 16.4 in "make showversion" and rte_version().

Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>
---
 lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_version.h | 10 +++++-----
 mk/rte.sdkconfig.mk                         |  2 +-
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
  

2016-02-10 14:33, John McNamara:
>  /**
>   * Major version number i.e. the x in x.y.z
>   */
> -#define RTE_VER_MAJOR 2
> +#define RTE_VER_MAJOR 16
>  
>  /**
>   * Minor version number i.e. the y in x.y.z
>   */
> -#define RTE_VER_MINOR 3
> +#define RTE_VER_MINOR 4
>

I liked the idea of Bruce of renaming these constants to
*_YEAR and *_MONTH.
I also think RTE_VER_PATCH_LEVEL should be RTE_VER_MINOR.
And maybe that RTE_VER_PATCH_RELEASE should be RTE_VER_RELEASE.

It shouldn't hurt applications as they must use RTE_VERSION
and rte_version().

Opinions?
  

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 04:11:40PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2016-02-10 14:33, John McNamara:
> >  /**
> >   * Major version number i.e. the x in x.y.z
> >   */
> > -#define RTE_VER_MAJOR 2
> > +#define RTE_VER_MAJOR 16
> >  
> >  /**
> >   * Minor version number i.e. the y in x.y.z
> >   */
> > -#define RTE_VER_MINOR 3
> > +#define RTE_VER_MINOR 4
> >
> 
> I liked the idea of Bruce of renaming these constants to
> *_YEAR and *_MONTH.
> I also think RTE_VER_PATCH_LEVEL should be RTE_VER_MINOR.
> And maybe that RTE_VER_PATCH_RELEASE should be RTE_VER_RELEASE.
> 
> It shouldn't hurt applications as they must use RTE_VERSION
> and rte_version().
> 
> Opinions?

Well, I always tend to like Bruce's ideas too, so +1 from me :-)

/Bruce
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 3:12 PM
> To: Mcnamara, John <john.mcnamara@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] version: switch to year/month version numbers
> 
> ...
>
> I liked the idea of Bruce of renaming these constants to *_YEAR and
> *_MONTH.
> I also think RTE_VER_PATCH_LEVEL should be RTE_VER_MINOR.
> And maybe that RTE_VER_PATCH_RELEASE should be RTE_VER_RELEASE.
> 
> It shouldn't hurt applications as they must use RTE_VERSION and
> rte_version().
> 
> Opinions?


That seems like a good change. I'll resubmit.

John.
--