[or-cvs] Split version info into separate spec doc.

[nickm@xxxxxxxx (Nick Mathewson)]

Update of /home/or/cvsroot/tor/doc
In directory moria.mit.edu:/tmp/cvs-serv20163/doc

Modified Files:
	Makefile.am TODO 
Added Files:
	version-spec.txt 
Log Message:
Split version info into separate spec doc.

Index: Makefile.am
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/or/cvsroot/tor/doc/Makefile.am,v
retrieving revision 1.9
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -d -r1.9 -r1.10
--- Makefile.am	13 Nov 2004 02:49:11 -0000	1.9
+++ Makefile.am	19 Mar 2005 05:07:19 -0000	1.10
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-EXTRA_DIST = tor-spec.txt CLIENTS FAQ HACKING rend-spec.txt control-spec.txt tor-doc.html tor-doc.css tor-resolve.1
+EXTRA_DIST = tor-spec.txt CLIENTS FAQ HACKING rend-spec.txt control-spec.txt tor-doc.html tor-doc.css tor-resolve.1 version-spec.txt
 
 man_MANS = tor.1 tor-resolve.1
 

Index: TODO
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/or/cvsroot/tor/doc/TODO,v
retrieving revision 1.284
retrieving revision 1.285
diff -u -d -r1.284 -r1.285
--- TODO	19 Mar 2005 05:06:22 -0000	1.284
+++ TODO	19 Mar 2005 05:07:19 -0000	1.285
@@ -116,8 +116,11 @@
   o Feed end reason back into SOCK5 as reasonable.
 R o cache .foo.exit names better, or differently, or not.
   o make !advertised_server_mode() ORs fetch dirs less often.
-N - Clean up NT service code even more.  Document it. Enable it by default.
-    Make sure it works.
+N . NT Service code
+    o Clean up NT service code even more.
+    o Enable it by default.
+    o Make sure it works.
+    . Document it.
 
  Documentation
   o Document new version system.

--- NEW FILE: version-spec.txt ---
$Id: version-spec.txt,v 1.1 2005/03/19 05:07:19 nickm Exp $

HOW TOR VERSION NUMBERS WORK
============================

The Old Way
-----------

Before 0.1.0, versions were of the format:
    MAJOR.MINOR.MICRO(status(PATCHLEVEL))?(-cvs)?
where MAJOR, MINOR, MICRO, and PATCHLEVEL are numbers, status is one
of "pre" (for an alpha release), "rc" (for a release candidate), or
"." for a release.  As a special case, "a.b.c" was equivalent to
"a.b.c.0".  We compare the elements in order (major, minor, micro,
status, patchlevel, cvs), with "cvs" preceding non-cvs.

We would start each development branch with a final version in mind:
say, "0.0.8".  Our first pre-release would be "0.0.8pre1", followed by
(for example) "0.0.8pre2-cvs", "0.0.8pre2", "0.0.8pre3-cvs",
"0.0.8rc1", "0.0.8rc2-cvs", and "0.0.8rc2".  Finally, we'd release
0.0.8.  The stable CVS branch would then be versioned "0.0.8.1-cvs",
and any eventual bugfix release would be "0.0.8.1".


The New Way
-----------

After 0.1.0, versions are of the format:
   MAJOR.MINOR.MICRO(.PATCHLEVEL)(-status_tag)
The stuff in parenthesis is optional.  As before, MAJOR, MINOR, MICRO,
and PATCHLEVEL are numbers, with an absent number equivalent to 0.
All versions should be distinguishable purely by those four
numbers. The status tag is purely informational, and lets you know how
stable we think the release is: "alpha" is pretty unstable; "rc" is a
release candidate; and no tag at all means that we have a final
release. If the tag ends with "-cvs", you're looking at a development
snapshot that came after a given release.  If we *do* encounter two
versions that differ only by status tag, we compare them lexically.

Now, we start each development branch with (say) 0.1.1.1-alpha.  The
patchlevel increments consistently as the status tag changes, for
example, as in: 0.1.1.2-alpha, 0.1.1.3-alpha, 0.1.1.4-rc 0.1.1.5-rc,
Eventually, we release 0.1.1.6.  The next patch release is 0.1.1.7.

Between these releases, CVS is versioned with a -cvs tag: after
0.1.1.1-alpha comes 0.1.1.1-alpha-cvs, and so on.