[Bálint Réczey <balint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Gerald,

Gerald Combs <gerald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ezt írta (időpont: 2024. dec. 31., K, 0:37):
>
> Our current tag syntax wasn't really based on a grand plan. As described at
>
> https://lists.wireshark.org/archives/wireshark-dev/201401/msg00194.html
>
> the "wireshark-" tags were created during the migration from Subversion to git, and the "v" tags were created afterward to tag our releases and release candidates. The "v" prefix was chosen because it's commonly-used for version tags. It wouldn't require too much effort on our end to switch from the "v" prefix to "wsv", but I'm not sure how it would affect downstream users.
>
> I'd like to avoid adding "stratoshark-" tags simply because we already have a bunch of tag types and tags, but that might not be possible. I tried dropping the "wireshark-" tags for the same reason but at least one distribution uses them for downstream monitoring:
>
> https://lists.wireshark.org/archives/wireshark-dev/201903/msg00000.html

Thanks, I have switched to monitoring "v" tags since then, thus feel
free to drop the "wireshark-" tags from my side. Sorry for not
bringing this up earlier.

> No one has objected to the "ssv0.9.0rc0" tag for 8140ad525b so far. I'll create that in a bit since it's required for the upcoming 0.9.0 release.
>
> On 12/29/24 3:21 AM, Jaap Keuter wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > How much conflict would it create to ‘enhance’ the tag format throughout? I’m not particularly found of having a temporal influence on the format.
> >
> > Would the following work, avoiding ambiguity:
> > - Release tags: wireshark-/x.y.z/ / stratoshark-/x.y.z/
> > - Release tags: wsv/x.y.z/ / ssv/x.y.z/
> > - RC tags: wsv/x.y.z/rc/n/ / ssv/x.y.z/rc/n/
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jaap
> >
> >> On 26 Dec 2024, at 23:17, Gerald Combs <gerald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I'm working on the Stratoshark release roadmap and have landed on the following schedule:
> >>
> >>  Jan 15 Stratoshark 0.9.0
> >>  Jan 29 Stratoshark 0.9.1
> >>  February, March, and April: more 0.9.x releases
> >>  May 21 Stratoshark 1.0
> >>
> >> In the near term this will provide releases with stable URLs ahead of my FOSDEM talks in early February and ensure that our release infrastructure has the necessary plumbing for Stratoshark. Releasing 1.0 in May is somewhat arbitrary but it would be nice to have that done before SharkFest US.
> >>
> >> As part of this I plan on adding a new git tag prefix for Stratoshark. We currently use the prefix "v" for Wireshark releases and release candidates, e.g. "v4.4.2" for the Wireshark 4.4.2 release and "v4.4.3rc0" for the 4.4.3 automated builds. I'd like to add the tag prefix "ssv" for Stratoshark releases and release candidates, with the initial tag "ssv0.9.0rc0" pointing to commit 8140ad525b. Tag v4.5.0rc0 points to the same commit, which will ensure that automated Stratoshark builds have contiguous "additional commit" numbers after adding the new tag.

Since Stratoshark is newly developed in the Wireshark repository I
understand why a sub-1.0 version number reflects its maturity better
and why frequent early releases could be beneficial for early
adopters.
Going forward OTOH it would be way easier if we just bumped
Stratoshark's version to match Wiresharks' and release Stratoshark
with Wireshark like we do with tshark and other related tools.

That would avoid the problem of dealing with wireshark and stratoshark
using the same shared libraries (libwireshark, libwiretap, libwsutil),
but requiring different versions. This may not be a problem where
everything is bundled, like on Windows, but for Linux distribution it
would be something to work out.

What do you think?

Cheers,
Balint