List of releases


#1

I am packaging HDFView / JHDF for Debian.
To be able to automatically determine if a new release of HDFView is available, it would be great to have a webpage with a list of all the releases (or at least the most recent ones) and a direct link to their source code.
If such a page already exists, please show it to me.

If for any reason this is not possible/desirable, tags on a VCS repository would be enough.
I have found the Bitbucket repository at https://bitbucket.hdfgroup.org/projects/HDFVIEW/repos/hdfview, but there are no tags that would allow one to automatically find and download new releases.

Edit: I found the page https://support.hdfgroup.org/ftp/HDF5/releases/HDF-JAVA/, which seems to be pretty close to what I need, but the tar.gz files are found in sub-directories, and are not listed on a single page.
I will try to work from this.
Anyway, tags in the Bitbucket repo would be nice.


#2

I agree that versioned tags of HDFView should be easier to find.

It would also be great if it was easier to determine which version of HDF a given version of HDFView is intended to be used with. I know there is a submenu inside HDFView that displays the version number for the packaged HDF4/HDF5 libraries, but this requires downloading the tar.gz to figure out.


#3

Thank you for your comments!

The lack of a tag for the HDFView release(s) was an oversight on our part. The HDFView-3.0 release is now tagged. See:

https://bitbucket.hdfgroup.org/projects/HDFVIEW/repos/hdfview/browse?at=refs%2Ftags%2FHDFView-3.0-1.10

From the above link, you can now click on the Tags image (at the bottom left) to see the version of HDF5 that HDFView was built with (and we can add the HDF4 version, as well). It brings you here:

https://bitbucket.hdfgroup.org/plugins/servlet/view-tags?repo=hdfview&projKey=HDFVIEW

See the “Description” field.


#4

Thank you for tagging the release.
So, there seem to be two version numbers: 3.0 and 1.10.
Is this numbering system meant to last?


#5

The tagging numbering system should remain. The idea is that HDFView will continue with version 3 until a major architecture change and we will note which major version of hdf5 was used for the HDFView release.
Our intention is to mention the hdf5 minor version in the tag comments.

We welcome any feedback on this tag naming scheme.

Allen


#6

If I get it correctly, 3.0 is the actual version of HDFView, and 1.10 is the version of HDF5.
Is that right?
What if a new release of HDF5 comes out, but no changes in HDFView are needed?

This system looks fine to me, even though I would probably have numbered versions of HDFView independently from HDF5.


#7

This is just the tag for the source release. It was suggested that we include the hdf5 version.
If there is a new release of hdf5 that requires no changes to HDFView then there will be no release of HDFView source and therefore no new tag.
However, as we expect to make improvements to HDFView the HDFView versions will increment from 3.0 to 3.1 to 3.2, etc. The tags will change accordingly and the hdf5 version will not change until we start using hdf5 1.12.
Of course, as we release new HDFView version we will indicate the hdf5 minor version in the tag description.

Allen


#8

OK. I understand.
It is just that if I use tags to automatically download new releases of HDFView, by default the Debian package will be numbered accordingly, with something like 3.0-1.10.
This is not a problem, just a remark. Maybe I can even get rid of the last part, if it is not needed.
Also, are there no minor versions for HDFView?

Edit: In fact, it is pretty easy to get rid of the HDF5 version, so if you tell me that 3.0 is the version number I need, everything is good.