namecoin
Tagging scheme
Upstream Bitcoin Core changed their version numbering scheme from 0.21.0 to 22.0, i.e. they've done a left-shift to remove the leading 0.. Namecoin Core followed this change in the source code, which I am supportive of. However, it looks like for Git tagging, we didn't follow upstream, i.e. the latest tag is nc0.22.0 instead of nc22.0. Is there a reason we didn't follow upstream, or was this just an autopilot error?
Conveniently, the nc0.22.0 tag does not actually build properly (see https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin-core/pull/454 for one of the needed fixes), so we could use this as an opportunity to retag as nc22.0 once I've verified that all the needed fixes have been merged and backported.
Hm. I don't remember all the details about when I merged the upstream changes in the versioning, but I thought we did not actually follow upstream in that respect; but maybe I mixed this up with Xaya, where we use different versioning already (and thus I had to do some conflict resolution).
I don't have a strong opinion about following the upstream change, but I agree the tags should be matching up with the in-code version. I did tag nc0.22.0 because I remembered to have adjusted the code changes back to the old scheme, but if that was wrong, we absolutely should change the tagging scheme as well of course.
Hm. I don't remember all the details about when I merged the upstream changes in the versioning, but I thought we did not actually follow upstream in that respect; but maybe I mixed this up with Xaya, where we use different versioning already (and thus I had to do some conflict resolution).
I haven't looked at the code itself, but opening the About Namecoin Core dialog in a recent Namecoin-Qt build from master shows the version as "v22.99.0", which I think indicates we followed upstream. Have I missed something?
I don't have a strong opinion about following the upstream change, but I agree the tags should be matching up with the in-code version. I did tag
nc0.22.0because I remembered to have adjusted the code changes back to the old scheme, but if that was wrong, we absolutely should change the tagging scheme as well of course.
Okay, so let's wait for a few fixes to be merged/backported, and then we can retag as nc22.0.