From kde-core-devel Fri Jan 23 11:45:04 2009 From: "David Jarvie" Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:45:04 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: Application version numbers Message-Id: <1f90e37576ed3d7f5d3cd73b2477018a.squirrel () www ! sensical ! net> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=123271112402281 On Thu, January 22, 2009 3:35 pm, Jason 'vanRijn' Kasper wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 2:34 AM, Andreas Pakulat wrote: > >> On 22.01.09 04:49:41, John Tapsell wrote: >> > Is it possible to have an application version just simply be the >> > version number of KDE? >> >> Technically: Yes, those apps can simply #include kdeversion.h and use >> the defines for versions that are in there. >> >> Wether or not the app authors want that change is a different story ;) > I think one reason that we've specifically not just followed KDE's > numbering > scheme, is that there have been several times in the past where we've had > to > release an interim bug-fix version of KPilot in between scheduled KDE > releases. Maybe KPilot is special in this regard in that most apps don't > have the potential of destroying anyone's data in new and exciting ways, > but > there's one reason I can think of for not trying to get every app to just > use the same version number as the KDE release they're distributed with. > *shrug* KAlarm has independent releases, in addition to KDE releases. So it also needs its own version numbering. -- David Jarvie. KAlarm author & maintainer. http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm