RunRev 2.1

[Ben Rubinstein]

There are three functions in Rev (first two also in MetaCard)
    version() -- currently returns "2.5.1B3" for my latest copy
    buildNumber() -- currently returns "3"
    revAppVersion() -- currently returns "2.1B3"

(BTW, something weird here; when I first wrote this, I found that version()
returned "2.5.1B3", while revAppVersion() returned "2.1B3" - in other words
the build number was automatatically appended.  I thought this was odd, and
confirmed that on Rev 2.0.3 this didn't happen.  A reboot later, I've
rechecked and found it isn't happening on Rev 2.1 either.  Weird.)

(BTW2: note that you can say "the version" or "the buildNumber" as they are
built into the engine; but can only say "revAppVersion()" because it isn't,
at least for now.)

Note that revAppVersion covers both the IDE and all the other elements that
have (until now) being Rev-only features; so it's relevant even to
standalones, as you are looking at version 2.1 of the Database functions,
the XML library, etc as well as the IDE.

I think it would be helpful for Rev to clarify (which probably means
decide!) what their policy will be going forward.  There's no reason now to
expect engine releases independent of "Revolution" releases.  Maybe
revAppVersion() should be retired, and the next major update magically jump
to 2.6, allowing the engine and Rev to have the same version number.

Thoughts from Rev would be received with interest.


on 27/8/03 10:19 am, Robert Brenstein wrote

> Thanks, Ken. I'd guess that it is logical to assume that Rev 2.1 has
> most of its changes done in IDE code and the engine underwent only
> minor improvements. Since some of the IDE features may need (in the
> future) to be tied into specific engine version, we would need a
> clear statement from RunRev that they keep version() and revVersion()
> as they are, and we add mcVersion() to compliment these.
> 
> Robert
> 
> 
> 
>> Robert,
>> 
>> The "version" returns "2.5.1", and the "buildNumber" returns "1".
>> 
>> 
>> Ken Ray
>> Sons of Thunder Software
>> Email: kray at sonsothunder.com
>> Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
>> 
>> 
>>>  From:     Robert Brenstein <rjb at rz.uni-potsdam.de>
>>>  Reply-To: metacard at lists.runrev.com
>>>  Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 01:45:07 +0200
>>>  To:     metacard at lists.runrev.com
>>>  Subject: Re: RunRev 2.1
>>> 
>>>>  Robert Brenstein wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>   I think you misread my email. I did not mean the low-level
>>>>>   interaction between the engine and the IDE but keeping track of
>>>>>   different versions. MC IDE is now becoming a "product" on its own. I
>>>>>   presume that we continue its version numbering regardless of versions
>>>>>   of the engine.
>>>> 
>>>>  I see.  I believe the IDE has a version property; if not it would
>>>> be easy to
>>>>  add one, and the project leader could be responsible for updating it
>>>>  whenever a release is posted.
>>> 
>>>  Hmm, has anyone checked what version() returns for engine of Rev 2.1?
>>>  Rev's IDE version is returned by revVersion() if I am not mistaken.
>>>  We can add mcVersion() or implement it as a global property, although
>>>  the former would be more consistent if RunRev keeps version() and
>>>  revVersion().
>>> 
>>>  Robert
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>  metacard mailing list
>>>  metacard at lists.runrev.com
>>>  http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> metacard mailing list
>> metacard at lists.runrev.com
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
> 
> _______________________________________________
> metacard mailing list
> metacard at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard

 
  Ben Rubinstein               |  Email: benr_mc at cogapp.com
  Cognitive Applications Ltd   |  Phone: +44 (0)1273-821600
  http://www.cogapp.com        |  Fax  : +44 (0)1273-728866