Do you maintain or contribute to a library, especially a KDE library (other than the Frameworks)? If so, I have a question for you.
First, some background. These days, the norm for libraries is to follow some variation of semantic versioning, where the version number follows the scheme x.y.z (eg: 1.4.3) and it should always be safe to upgrade the library to version with a higher y (minor) component as long as the x (major) component is the same. Qt follows this scheme, for example.
This scheme doesn’t really allow for alpha versions of software, though – the alpha releases for the (x+1) major version can be incompatible with both version x and with the final releases of version (x+1). The Semantic Versioning scheme prescribes using versions like x.y.z-alpha1, but this breaks the nicely numeric scheme we had, and not all tools can cope with that.
KDE Frameworks (and, in the past, kdelibs) approached this by defining some arbitrarily high minor version (typically 90+) to indicate pre-releases for the next major release. So the pre-release Frameworks were numbered like 4.90.1.
So where is all of this going? Well, CMake provides a helpful function to write package version information files that allow find_package() calls to only find compatible versions. So if you use the SameMajorVersion scheme, find_package(Foo 4.3) will find Foo 4.3.0 and Foo 4.5.2, but not Foo 4.2.5 or Foo 5.1.1. However, if project Foo uses the “high minor = next version prerelease” scheme, it will also find Foo 4.90.1, which is not compatible with Foo 4.3.
I wrote a SameMajorVersionWithPreleases scheme that would deal with this for Extra CMake Modules, but never committed it because I wasn’t sure if it would get used (KDE Frameworks doesn’t need it because we put KF5 in the package names). My question is: would your project find this useful? In other words, do you contribute to (or know of) a CMake-based project that uses the “high minor = next version prerelease” scheme I described above? If so, please comment!