debug/detailed level message when MinVerMajorMinor is redundant

[adamralph]

debug/detailed level message when MinVerMajorMinor is redundant

[bording]

Can you explain the scenario a bit more? I'm not sure I follow what the problem would be here.

[adamralph]

@bording if MinVerMajorMinor is set to 1.0, and a 1.1 tag is added, then MinVerMajorMinor is redundant, since the tag supersedes it.

[bording]

Why does that need to be a warning? We're expecting it to be superseded in that case. It was originally called something like "minimumMajorMinor".

I've been thinking of that value as the same as the GitVersion's next-version property, which sets the floor for the version but doesn't set the ceiling.

[adamralph]

I guess it doesn't have to be a warning, it could just be a message at the info/normal level.

I keep thinking about changing the name back to MinVerMinimumMajorMinor but then finding excuses not to. I just found that name so unwieldy, but I guess it would completely remove the need for any message saying it's redundant, because the redundancy in the presence of a later tag is implicit in the name.

It also would get rid of the lingering concern I have that people may think they need to increase the value to the next major-minor before they start labelling with that major-minor. Perhaps I should just bite the bullet and rename it back again...

[bording]

I do think MinVerMinimumMajorMinor expresses the intent better. If you have full verbose logging on, I would expect to see something that indicates that it was used to set the minimum version, but then something else (a tag) caused the version to be higher.

[adamralph]

If you have full verbose logging on, I would expect to see something that indicates that it was used to set the minimum version, but then something else (a tag) caused the version to be higher.

Makes sense. I'll convert this issue to that.

[adamralph]

Also raised #153

[adamralph]

Released in beta 2.