## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Client version string is inconsistent. Building `v20.0.0-beta.8` tag
locally produces binaries that report `v20.0.0-beta.8` version but
binaries built in guix would report
`v20.0.0rc1-g3e732a952226a20505f907e4fd9b3fdbb14ea5ee` instead. Building
any commit after `v20.0.0-beta.8` locally would result in versions like
`v20.0.0rc1-8c94153d2497` which is close but it's still yet another
format. And both versions with `rc1` in their names are confusing cause
you'd expect them to mention `beta.8` instead maybe (or is it just me?
:D ).
## What was done?
Change it so that the version string would look like this:
on tag: ~`v20.0.0-beta.8-dev` or `v20.0.0-beta.8-gitarc`~
`v20.0.0-beta.8`
post-tag: ~`v20.0.0-beta.8-1-gb837e08164-gitarc`~
`v20.0.0-beta.8-1-gb837e08164`
post-tag format is
`recent tag`-`commits since that tag`-`g+12 chars of commit hash`-`dirty
(optional)` ~-`dev or gitarc`~
~`dev`/`gitarc` suffixes should help avoiding confusion with the release
versions and they also indicate the way non-release binaries were
built.~
Note that release binaries do not use any of this, they still use
`PACKAGE_VERSION` from `configure` like before.
Also, `CLIENT_VERSION_RC` is no longer used in this setup so it was
removed.
Few things aren't clear to me yet:
1. Version bump in `configure.ac` no longer affects the reported version
(unless it's an actual release). Are there any downsides I might be
missing?
2. Which tag should we use on `develop` once we bump version in
configure? `v21.0.0-init`? `v21.0.0-alpha1`?
3. How is it going to behave once `merge master back into develop` kind
of PR is merged? E.g. say `develop` branch is on `v21.0.0-alpha1` tag
and we merge v20.1.0 from `master` back into it. Will this bring
`v20.1.0` release tag into `develop`? Will it become the one that will
be used from that moment? If so we will probably need another tag on
`develop` every time such PR is merged e.g. `v21.0.0-alpha2` (or
whatever the next number is).
Don't think these are blockers but would like to hear thoughts from
others.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Built binaries locally, built them using guix at a specific tag and at
some commit on top of it.
## Breaking Changes
n/a
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
5100deee5822795d385570a380d3c117d05d851d clientversion: No suffix #if CLIENT_VERSION_IS_RELEASE (Carl Dong)
Pull request description:
```
Previously, building from a release source tarball would result in a
version string like v22.0.0-<commithash>, but we expect just v22.0.0.
This commit solves this problem.
Also use PACKAGE_VERSION instead of reconstructing it.
```
Fixes the underlying problem of #22623
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 5100deee5822795d385570a380d3c117d05d851d
fanquake:
ACK 5100deee5822795d385570a380d3c117d05d851d - tested that prior the output of `src/bitcoind -version` on the `22.x` branch was `Bitcoin Core version v22.0.0-d3bd5410f64e`, and with this commit cherry-picked it is `Bitcoin Core version v22.0.0rc2`.
Tree-SHA512: 78705e285ff1271d5012e888837049044db4d11d66c252c6b964685892ef078c56fe122f12daa87c71532f4352f695d1e88a228665adcd7afe3ddce3f209b49f
8f7b93047581c67f2133cdb8c7845471de66c30f Drop the leading 0 from the version number (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
Removes the leading 0 from the version number. The minor version, which we had been using as the major version, is now the major version. The revision, which we had been using as the minor version, is now the minor version. The revision number is dropped. The build number is promoted to being part of the version number. This also avoids issues where it was accidentally not included in the version number.
The CLIENT_VERSION remains the same format as previous as previously, as the Major version was 0 so it never actually got included in it.
The user agent string formatter is updated to follow this new versioning.
***
Honestly I'm just tired of all of the people asking for "1.0" that maybe this'll shut them up. Skip the whole 1.0 thing and go straight to version 22.0!
Also, this means that the terminology we commonly use lines up with how the variables are named. So major versions are actually bumping the major version number, etc.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 8f7b930475
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 8f7b93047581c67f2133cdb8c7845471de66c30f 🎻
Tree-SHA512: b5c3fae14d4c0a9c0ab3b1db7c949ecc0ac3537646306b13d98dd0efc17c489cdd16d43f0a24aaa28e9c4a92ea360500e05480a335b03f9fb308010cdd93a436
* Always show full version precision
Signed-off-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
* add field "formattedversion" to `getnetworkinfo` that is the version, to include rc info, commit info, dirty, etc as available
Signed-off-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
* use `buildversion` instead of `formattedversion`
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
* adjust unit tests
Signed-off-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
a71c56a clientversion: Use full commit hash for commit-based version descriptions (Luke Dashjr)
Pull request description:
git keeps changing the number of digits in abbreviated hashes, resulting in the GitHub archive hash changing because we include it here.
To workaround this and avoid hashes that become increasingly ambiguous later on, just include the full commit hash when building from git.
This has no effect on tagged releases.
(Cleanly mergable back to 0.10 without backport)
Tree-SHA512: b0be5391fadd16fbc9bbeffe1574a61c95931cbf6dea885d7e3cfcd3474b89e71767b1b55b4eeeeb66e4e119e78ff579cd9d206366d36928a209a31e1c1eed75
a720b92 Remove includes in .cpp files for things the corresponding .h file already included (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Remove includes in .cpp files for things the corresponding .h file already included.
Example case:
* `addrdb.cpp` includes `addrdb.h` and `fs.h`
* `addrdb.h` includes `fs.h`
Then remove the direct inclusion of `fs.h` in `addrman.cpp` and rely on the indirect inclusion of `fs.h` via the included `addrdb.h`.
In line with the header include guideline (see #10575).
Tree-SHA512: 8704b9de3011a4c234db336a39f7d2c139e741cf0f7aef08a5d3e05197e1e18286b863fdab25ae9638af4ff86b3d52e5cab9eed66bfa2476063aa5c79f9b0346
* scripted-diff: Replace #include "" with #include <> (ryanofsky)
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
for f in \
src/*.cpp \
src/*.h \
src/bench/*.cpp \
src/bench/*.h \
src/compat/*.cpp \
src/compat/*.h \
src/consensus/*.cpp \
src/consensus/*.h \
src/crypto/*.cpp \
src/crypto/*.h \
src/crypto/ctaes/*.h \
src/policy/*.cpp \
src/policy/*.h \
src/primitives/*.cpp \
src/primitives/*.h \
src/qt/*.cpp \
src/qt/*.h \
src/qt/test/*.cpp \
src/qt/test/*.h \
src/rpc/*.cpp \
src/rpc/*.h \
src/script/*.cpp \
src/script/*.h \
src/support/*.cpp \
src/support/*.h \
src/support/allocators/*.h \
src/test/*.cpp \
src/test/*.h \
src/wallet/*.cpp \
src/wallet/*.h \
src/wallet/test/*.cpp \
src/wallet/test/*.h \
src/zmq/*.cpp \
src/zmq/*.h
do
base=${f%/*}/ relbase=${base#src/} sed -i "s:#include \"\(.*\)\"\(.*\):if test -e \$base'\\1'; then echo \"#include <\"\$relbase\"\\1>\\2\"; else echo \"#include <\\1>\\2\"; fi:e" $f
done
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
Signed-off-by: Pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
* scripted-diff: Replace #include "" with #include <> (Dash Specific)
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
for f in \
src/bls/*.cpp \
src/bls/*.h \
src/evo/*.cpp \
src/evo/*.h \
src/governance/*.cpp \
src/governance/*.h \
src/llmq/*.cpp \
src/llmq/*.h \
src/masternode/*.cpp \
src/masternode/*.h \
src/privatesend/*.cpp \
src/privatesend/*.h
do
base=${f%/*}/ relbase=${base#src/} sed -i "s:#include \"\(.*\)\"\(.*\):if test -e \$base'\\1'; then echo \"#include <\"\$relbase\"\\1>\\2\"; else echo \"#include <\\1>\\2\"; fi:e" $f
done
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
Signed-off-by: Pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
* build: Remove -I for everything but project root
Remove -I from build system for everything but the project root,
and built-in dependencies.
Signed-off-by: Pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
# Conflicts:
# src/Makefile.test.include
* qt: refactor: Use absolute include paths in .ui files
* qt: refactor: Changes to make include paths absolute
This makes all include paths in the GUI absolute.
Many changes are involved as every single source file in
src/qt/ assumes to be able to use relative includes.
Signed-off-by: Pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
# Conflicts:
# src/qt/dash.cpp
# src/qt/optionsmodel.cpp
# src/qt/test/rpcnestedtests.cpp
* test: refactor: Use absolute include paths for test data files
* Recommend #include<> syntax in developer notes
* refactor: Include obj/build.h instead of build.h
* END BACKPORT #11651 Remove trailing whitespace causing travis failure
* fix backport 11651
Signed-off-by: Pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
* More of 11651
* fix blockchain.cpp
Signed-off-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
* Add missing "qt/" in includes
* Add missing "test/" in includes
* Fix trailing whitespaces
Co-authored-by: Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Russell Yanofsky <russ@yanofsky.org>
Co-authored-by: MeshCollider <dobsonsa68@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
