What is the current version, and how are versions decided?

mirkwood · Post by **mirkwood** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:24 pm

Hi,

Excuse me if this is already answered, but I'm new here...

I've seen references to version 0.7.1a4 in a few places -- is this the current version number (not Subversion revision number) that we're using?

How are the versions determined -- i.e., when is version number incremented and what determines when to do that?

I have binary versions of the current svn rev for Windows (using Cygwin) and Linux that I'd like to post on the FTP site, I just would like to know what to call the files.

I'll also be posting details on my changes to the code for Cygwin in this forum before committing the changes to Subversion, just so that people can see what I've done and stop me from checking in the code if something looks terribly wrong. I've compiled it under Windows and Linux, it'd be good if I could get someone to compile the code under Mac OSX to make sure it still works, so maybe I'll post a tarball of the source before comitting it so someone can do that.

Adam

dynaflash · Post by **dynaflash** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:35 pm

Well, that is a good question. In fact, I have a new svn checkin that fixes the mac gui drive detection a bit further and defaults the name of the output movie to the name of the DVD (instead of "Movie").

I have brought this up before, but no one seemed to have an answer.

I think we need to get all of our test/power users on the same page as we are updating test builds for them to hammer on.

The whole 0.7.1 obviously started with the last version from titer. rhester appended an a to it when he moved everything to this site and did his excellent work on h.264 encoding. So, I have been referring to binaries by incrementing the last number. I do think at some point we need to figure out how we want the versioning to advance as opposed to an endless number of 0.7.1a38859485749 !

I want to get this latest rev checked into the svn as it fixes the where the mac gui crashes on dvd detection in some circumstances. Then, I agree a versioning conversation should take place.

rhester · Post by **rhester** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:26 pm

I think the basics of versioning applies here. Major revisions/massive updates of functionality or look-and-feel justify a full version bump (0.8.x), whereas bugfixes/minor functionality improvements would bump the minor revision (0.7.2 would be next).

As for whether everything that's been improved upon now justifies a 0.8.0 moniker as opposed to 0.7.2 is subjective. I had originally expected 0.7.2 when the only major improvement was the addition of "high-res" iPod support, but the app has been taken so much further since then that 0.8.0 may well be justifiable.

Rodney

rhester · Post by **rhester** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:31 pm

Actually, to that end, we need to seriously consider whether we're going to move future "automatic update" functionality to this site. I had been holding off on making such a decision pending a possible resurfacing of titer, but since that looks increasingly unlikely (he's clearly moved on to other things), we should really consider controlling that ourselves (anyone know the algorithm for how it determines a release is 'new'?).

Rodney

mirkwood · Post by **mirkwood** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:00 am

I'm not sure if you're referring to an automatic update feature that exists in the MacOSX GUI version, but...

It looks like the update code, at least to determine whether or not a new version is available, is in libhb/update.c.

It just opens a connection to port 80 (the HTTP port) on handbrake.m0k.org and does a GET /LATEST, which you can do yourself in a browser by going to the URL:

http://handbrake.m0k.org/LATEST

And once you do that you can see the format of the LATEST file, which is parsed by the code in update.c.

dynaflash · Post by **dynaflash** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:04 am

rhester wrote:I think the basics of versioning applies here. Major revisions/massive updates of functionality or look-and-feel justify a full version bump (0.8.x), whereas bugfixes/minor functionality improvements would bump the minor revision (0.7.2 would be next).

As for whether everything that's been improved upon now justifies a 0.8.0 moniker as opposed to 0.7.2 is subjective. I had originally expected 0.7.2 when the only major improvement was the addition of "high-res" iPod support, but the app has been taken so much further since then that 0.8.0 may well be justifiable.

Rodney

Well, it does seem that we have at least satisfied a 0.7.2 version. That is for sure.

To that end, I personally think that if we all get into agreement and decide we are at 0.7.2 or above, we should definitely consider a more prominent download spot on the site with information to that end, as well as consider it a "public" release. The folks out on titers site (which is almost all handbrake users) have no idea what we are doing here. Might make sense at that time to maybe get nonsanity (I think he is a mod) to post some stickies on the forums announcing this site and that we have a current public release.

dynaflash · Post by **dynaflash** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:11 am

As well, we would also need to consider a few other things in the about panels for the plists for Mac anyway. Still use titers info ? Personally I dont care, but newcomers to hb might get confused.