f72650d2de
## 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)_ |
||
|---|---|---|
| .github | ||
| .tx | ||
| build-aux/m4 | ||
| ci | ||
| contrib | ||
| depends | ||
| doc | ||
| share | ||
| src | ||
| test | ||
| .cirrus.yml | ||
| .dockerignore | ||
| .editorconfig | ||
| .fuzzbuzz.yml | ||
| .gitattributes | ||
| .gitignore | ||
| .gitlab-ci.yml | ||
| .python-version | ||
| .style.yapf | ||
| .travis.yml | ||
| autogen.sh | ||
| CMakeLists.txt | ||
| configure.ac | ||
| CONTRIBUTING.md | ||
| COPYING | ||
| INSTALL.md | ||
| libdashconsensus.pc.in | ||
| Makefile.am | ||
| README.md | ||
| SECURITY.md | ||
Dash Core staging tree
| CI | master | develop |
|---|---|---|
| Gitlab |  |
 |
For an immediately usable, binary version of the Dash Core software, see https://www.dash.org/downloads/.
Further information about Dash Core is available in the doc folder.
What is Dash?
Dash is an experimental digital currency that enables instant, private payments to anyone, anywhere in the world. Dash uses peer-to-peer technology to operate with no central authority: managing transactions and issuing money are carried out collectively by the network. Dash Core is the name of the open source software which enables the use of this currency.
For more information read the original Dash whitepaper.
License
Dash Core is released under the terms of the MIT license. See COPYING for more information or see https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT.
Development Process
The master branch is meant to be stable. Development is normally done in separate branches.
Tags are created to indicate new official,
stable release versions of Dash Core.
The develop branch is regularly built (see doc/build-*.md for instructions) and tested, but is not guaranteed to be
completely stable.
The contribution workflow is described in CONTRIBUTING.md and useful hints for developers can be found in doc/developer-notes.md.
Testing
Testing and code review is the bottleneck for development; we get more pull requests than we can review and test on short notice. Please be patient and help out by testing other people's pull requests, and remember this is a security-critical project where any mistake might cost people lots of money.
Automated Testing
Developers are strongly encouraged to write unit tests for new code, and to
submit new unit tests for old code. Unit tests can be compiled and run
(assuming they weren't disabled in configure) with: make check. Further details on running
and extending unit tests can be found in /src/test/README.md.
There are also regression and integration tests, written
in Python.
These tests can be run (if the test dependencies are installed) with: test/functional/test_runner.py
The Travis CI system makes sure that every pull request is built for Windows, Linux, and macOS, and that unit/sanity tests are run automatically.
Manual Quality Assurance (QA) Testing
Changes should be tested by somebody other than the developer who wrote the code. This is especially important for large or high-risk changes. It is useful to add a test plan to the pull request description if testing the changes is not straightforward.
Translations
Changes to translations as well as new translations can be submitted to Dash Core's Transifex page.
Translations are periodically pulled from Transifex and merged into the git repository. See the translation process for details on how this works.
Important: We do not accept translation changes as GitHub pull requests because the next pull from Transifex would automatically overwrite them again.