Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix Coverity and bump the version. #1238

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Oct 3, 2015
Merged

Fix Coverity and bump the version. #1238

merged 2 commits into from Oct 3, 2015

Conversation

tambry
Copy link
Contributor

@tambry tambry commented Oct 2, 2015

About the bump (from the commit message):
As it has been a long time since the last version bump, it would make sense to bump the version. 0.0.6 more specifically, since Zangetsu already did that and it was tagged and has already been linked on quite a few websites. It probably doesn't matter and 0.0.1 would make more sense.

I would like @DHrpcs3 to confirm if this is OK and if the version bump is problematic, then I can remove that commit, so only the Coverity Scan fix remains.

@DHrpcs3
Copy link
Contributor

DHrpcs3 commented Oct 2, 2015

let version be 0.0.0.6 for now

@tambry
Copy link
Contributor Author

tambry commented Oct 2, 2015

@DHrpcs3 Fixed.

@danilaml
Copy link
Contributor

danilaml commented Oct 2, 2015

@DHrpcs3 may I wonder why? Atm rpcs3 versioning doesn't make much sense. Or more like doesn't carry any sense. It's far from semantic versioninc, there is no rules on when to bump it. We can get rid of it altogether (and use only github commits) without any consequences.

@Zangetsu38
Copy link
Contributor

@DHrpcs3 Why do you want at all costs to keep these three 0?
At advancing rpcs3, these three 0 really have no sense, v0.0.0.5 rpcs3 the beginning, and that of this have nothing to see.

Whether the LLVM, DX12, "interpreter 2" and all the rest, there's even already has several games that turns perfectly trading 60 fps, and the other works but gently (Disgaea 3) then why would a this kept many 0 when the emulator is already so advanced.

The 0.0.0.6 is good, but it was eight months ago that he had put the it's just too late, the project out of position since, if one calculates a can, the emulator should 0.0.1 may be near the old tag were never as long term, the 5 remained more than a year, it's huge, + 2500 commit ...

If I put 0.0.6 it was just simplified the thing, and also that the project had really enormous progress.

@DHrpcs3
Copy link
Contributor

DHrpcs3 commented Oct 2, 2015

@Zangetsu38, you say about performance. What about emulation? v0.0.0.4 execute more samples than current master branch version. Real different between v0.0.0.4 and v0.0.0.6 (or v0.0.6 or v0.0.1 or v542323.543.65563) not so much as you think

@Zangetsu38
Copy link
Contributor

@DHrpcs3 hmm I see.
As you wish after all.

tambry added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2015
Fix Coverity and bump the version.
@tambry tambry merged commit f898ebf into RPCS3:master Oct 3, 2015
@tambry tambry deleted the CoverityFix branch October 3, 2015 05:46
Nekotekina added a commit to Nekotekina/rpcs3 that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2015
This reverts commit f898ebf, reversing
changes made to f677782.
Nekotekina added a commit to Nekotekina/rpcs3 that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2015
This reverts commit f898ebf, reversing
changes made to f677782.
Nekotekina added a commit to Nekotekina/rpcs3 that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2015
This reverts commit f898ebf, reversing
changes made to f677782.
Nekotekina added a commit to Nekotekina/rpcs3 that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2015
This reverts commit f898ebf, reversing
changes made to f677782.
Nekotekina added a commit to Nekotekina/rpcs3 that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2015
This reverts commit f898ebf, reversing
changes made to f677782.
Nekotekina added a commit to Nekotekina/rpcs3 that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2015
This reverts commit f898ebf, reversing
changes made to f677782.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants