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
Unusual semvar usage #40
Comments
Hmm, but its referring to the bitcoin core version, plus a number. Does cargo allow 0.19.0.1? Otherwise we probably have to stick with the |
Oh cool, I did not pick that up. Cheers, I did a PR adding docs to the version number. Also for the record I was wrong, the current version number is valid semvar. The Closing this issue. |
This is the valid semver, as you write later: https://semver.org/#spec-item-9 I think the best is to use |
Good idea! |
Currently we are vendoring the source code from Bitcoin Core `v0.19`. Update the submodule to use branch `0.21`, the tip of which is currently on tag `0.21.2`. Includes changes to the build script by Jake and update to the C++ toolchain suggested by Richard. Uses a new format for the version, discussed in GitHub issue rust-bitcoin#40 `M.m.p-M.m.p` where the first major,minor,patch is for Bitcoin Core and the second one is for this library. Updated the semvar version of this lib to `4.0.0` because of the changes to the C++ compiler used. Co-developed-by: Jake Rawsthorne <jake@jakerawsthorne.co.uk> Co-developed-by: Richard Ulrich <richard.ulrich@seba.swiss>
Why have we released versions
0.19.0-1
0.19.0-2
0.19.0-3
This is not valid semvar versioning according to the grammar? Shouldn't the versions have been
0.19.0
0.19.1
0.19.2
Note that cargo is handling these versions correctly it seems. I built
rust-bitcoin
depending on0.19.0-2
and got0.19.0-3
in the lock file.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: