`git describe`

[Ryan Schmidt]

> On Nov 29, 2016, at 2:57 AM, René J.V. Bertin <rjvbertin at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Monday November 28 2016 17:25:39 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> 
>> That's correct and intentional.
> 
> I also said that that version complied with practices I see elsewhere :)
> 
>> It was changed to 2.3.99 after we created the 2.3 release branch, which was 2 years ago. After we create a 2.4 release branch, the version on master will be changed to 2.4.99.
> 
> Then you have your answer in fact. When you bump the version in that script you can use git-release or equivalent to create a 2.4.99 tag, and from there on `git describe` would identify master as 2.4.99-<counter>-<shorthash> . That'd be almost exactly what I'd like to see (though later rather than sooner).

We don't want a x.x.99 tag. It wouldn't mean anything. x.x.99 means master. It doesn't mean any specific state of master.


> Would you consider adding an additional level by 2.3.6 (= 2.3.99.6) so that the master version keeps some form of synchronisation with the release version? I don't think that it suggests master is based on 2.3.X, but it does convey the message that 2.3.X contains things that were introduced into master before 2.3.99.X.

No, I would not consider adding such tags.