Trac2GitHub Transition of Modelica Assocication Projects

**Comment by dietmarw on 2 Oct 2015 06:07 UTC** I totally agree here with Henrik. Why would you try to make things more complicated than necessary and by doing it...

**Comment by hansolsson on 2 Oct 2015 10:06 UTC** Replying to [comment:18 henrikt]: > I think that having a single string containing the entire version is better, since it allows...

**Comment by dietmarw on 2 Oct 2015 11:00 UTC** Hans, the current tag already following semantic version **naming** (not meaning yet wrt expressing any compatibility with minor or patch though)...

**Comment by otter on 2 Oct 2015 12:24 UTC** The question is whether we should follow the precise semantic versioning rules defined on the web, or whether we adapt it...

**Comment by hansolsson on 2 Oct 2015 12:25 UTC** Replying to [comment:21 dietmarw]: > Hans, the current tag already following semantic version **naming** (not meaning yet wrt expressing any compatibility...

**Comment by hansolsson on 2 Oct 2015 12:41 UTC** Replying to [comment:22 otter]: > The question is whether we should follow the precise semantic versioning rules defined on the web,...

**Comment by hansolsson on 12 Nov 2015 08:48 UTC** The recent discussion about Modelica 2 License made me realize that something I had previously read is getting more important: **Semantic...

**Comment by choeger on 12 Nov 2015 09:38 UTC** I think that a distributed development scheme does not get along with versioning very well. In such a scenario, versioning is...

**Comment by sjoelund.se on 12 Nov 2015 09:47 UTC** Pre-release version numbers work rather OK for us in OpenModelica using git. For example: v1.9.4-dev.473+gea54626: 1.9.4 development, 473 commits from development...

**Comment by otter on 12 Nov 2015 10:04 UTC** Replying to [comment:27 sjoelund.se]: > Pre-release version numbers work rather OK for us in OpenModelica using git. For example: v1.9.4-dev.473+gea54626: 1.9.4...