Tag the initial commit

[Thann]

I makes sense to me to tag the initial commit at v1.8.0 so packagers have a canonical version to work with. =]

[furai]

I agree but I'm not sure that v1.8.0 should be the initial tag. The 1.8 version is the aim for us. To make it. The repo in current state is far from 1.8. So we probably should call it differently. I don't know right now what. Maybe v1.8.0-alpha Maybe some smaller number. Anything that actually fits cause initial commit for sure isn't 1.8.

Do you guys have any ideas?

[Thann]

I think v1.8.0-alpha is fine.

[Shoozza]

I'd say we should mostly follow https://semver.org/.
With the exception that the first number 1 will stick and the Patch number can be dropped if 0:
1.X.Y.Z-P+A (1.Major.Minor.Patch-Prerelease+Build)

Maybe we can also drop the v at the beggining (or is it a convention to use it in linux packages?)
So 1.8.0-alpha+initial
skipping the Patch number when not necessary
and using the Build meta information initial so we know it is the initial release of the source code - maybe 1.8.0-alpha+initial-floss to be 100% clear.

What do you think? Also are there any potential issues with that suggestion for packaging?

[furai]

So what is the decision? 1.8.0-alpha+initial ? I don't think floss part is required, it's on GitHub, it's open source, it has a license. What else would it be than FOSS/FLOSS.

[Shoozza]

initial tag: 1.8.0-alpha+initial created