I mean the
combined number of commits and git hash. For example:
TARGET=14.0.0
cd tde/main/tdelibs
echo $(basename $PWD)-trinity-$TARGET~pre$(git log $(git tag | sort |
tail -n1)..HEAD --pretty=oneline | wc -l)+$(git rev-parse HEAD | colrm 9)
This will give for all the exact same results. This will contain important
information == git hash. And also the growing number useful to simple
compare "older < later".
For example, my results for the current tdelibs (in both
branches):
+ tdelibs-trinity-14.0.0~pre385+189c12d0
+ tdelibs-trinity-3.5.13.2~pre12+205b3397
I'm not against the idea. :) More than likely the people using development branch
versions will be above average computer literate users. People with whom hash numbers
convey some information.
I'm concerned that to other end-users the string provides little meaning. Most
end-users are not geeks. They don't want to deal with hashes. To them a hash is
gibberish. A hash is familiar to developers. A date is familiar to all people. :)
tdelibs-trinity-14.0.0_201211101146
tdelibs-trinity-3.5.13.2_201211101146
Darrell