Re: [Miase-discuss] versioning

[Frank B. <fbergman@u.washington.edu>]

Hello,

here my thoughts on dealing with versioning. Currently, there exists  
no official release, as that would hopefully be accompanied by a  
comprehensive specification just like the SBML specifications. So I'm  
not too keen on naming things sedml-tmp, or sedom-tmp. if it needs to  
be anything a suffix as current sounds more promising.

Until a release, SVN manages successfully to keep track of all  
versions, and all revisions can be  restored, so there is no need to  
rename files. I can refer to:

http://miase.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/miase/sed-ml/documents/schema/sedml-version-0-release-1.xsd?revision=11

or

http://miase.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/miase/sed-ml/documents/schema/sedml-version-0-release-1.xsd?revision=23


without problems. So for discussions all is well ... once we agree   
versions should be kept and hopefully not modified. usually you find  
repositories separated into trunk (current branch), tags and branches  
(named versions), which allows to better keep track of current vs past  
things.

As soon as things become stable enough, why not keep them as in the  
sbml repository where you find them in directories separated by levels  
and versions i.e:

specifications/sbml-level-2/version-4/schema

so far my thoughts.

cheers
Frank

On Jan 28, 2009, at 7:46 AM, Dagmar Köhn wrote:

> Hej all,
>
> I have submitted a new version of the XML Schema on SF as "sedml- 
> tmp.xsd".
> For further proposals for corrections of the schema I would suggest to
> use the sedml-tmp.xsd file only. We can then discuss the changes and
> once we agreed on them I can update the "stable" schema.
>
> The same should be done for the UML object model - I have added a
> sedom-tmp.uml/sedom-tmp.pdf file on SF for discussion of changes on  
> the
> mailing list.
>
> The "stable" schema is the one called "sedml-version-0-release-1.xsd
> <http://miase.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/miase/sed-ml/documents/schema/sedml-version-0-release-1.xsd?view=log 
> >"
> and it should correspond to the CMSB paper and the current UML model  
> on
> SF [The schema does at the moment not correspond to the UML, but I  
> work
> on fixing that!].
>
>
> Any disagreements or better suggestions how to handle the different
> versions are very welcome.
> Please let me know.
>
> Dagmar
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by:
> SourcForge Community
> SourceForge wants to tell your story.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
> _______________________________________________
> Miase-discuss mailing list
> Mia...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/miase-discuss