tardo@nagi-fanboi.net wrote:

...

Here's a bug: pages other than index.php show $Id$ instead of Version: 1.4.0

Category and Name are squashed together (table header in packages.php). Same for Votes Voted Description

Fix version strings. Now you should only have to change AUR_VERSION in web/lib/config.inc and updates will be reflected across the site. KISS ftw. http://git.nagi-fanboi.net/?p=aur.git;a=commitdiff;h=6ec55dc3523a2cc5789f662...

The problem with this fix is that config.inc is intentionally NOT upgraded when we upgrade code, so it will fall to the user to have to remember to upgrade the version string which is exactly what we don't want. So maybe we could put the define in aur.inc instead, or someplace else that always gets included? I think aur.inc is always included. - P

eliott wrote:

On 9/30/07, Paul Mattal wrote:

...

tardo@nagi-fanboi.net wrote:

...

...

Here's a bug: pages other than index.php show $Id$ instead of Version: 1.4.0

Category and Name are squashed together (table header in packages.php). Same for Votes Voted Description

Fix version strings. Now you should only have to change AUR_VERSION in web/lib/config.inc and updates will be reflected across the site. KISS ftw. http://git.nagi-fanboi.net/?p=aur.git;a=commitdiff;h=6ec55dc3523a2cc5789f662...

The problem with this fix is that config.inc is intentionally NOT upgraded when we upgrade code, so it will fall to the user to have to remember to upgrade the version string which is exactly what we don't want.

So maybe we could put the define in aur.inc instead, or someplace else that always gets included? I think aur.inc is always included.

- P

How about we make a one time change to config.inc to include version.inc at the top. Then have a new file (version.inc) with nothing more than a define for the version variable.

aur.inc is messy enough. I would hate to start getting more random defines in there.

_______________________________________________ arch-projects mailing list arch-projects@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-projects

I'm not against either idea, but if a user checks out a copy of AUR and modifies then uses it, it should be his responsibility to change (or remove) the version number. Adding a version.inc still requires the user to modify it himself, and config.inc is ignored by git anyway, so it shouldn't affect the development process (i.e. only Paul should have to worry about changing the version number on the real AUR site). Either way, if you come to a consensus, a patch is easy to write for either. - tardo

tardo wrote:

I'm not against either idea, but if a user checks out a copy of AUR and modifies then uses it, it should be his responsibility to change (or remove) the version number. Adding a version.inc still requires the user to modify it himself, and config.inc is ignored by git anyway, so it shouldn't affect the development process (i.e. only Paul should have to worry about changing the version number on the real AUR site).

Either way, if you come to a consensus, a patch is easy to write for either.

I've taken tardo's patch and then modified it to include a version.inc from aur.inc. http://projects.archlinux.org/git/?p=aur.git;a=commit;h=22fcea238f0ede3def93... I think this addresses everyone's concerns, but is perhaps the least elegant solution! But it does work. This needn't be the end of this issue, but I didn't want bikeshed painting to stall this release. If we come up with something better, we can do it for next version. - P