Merge lp:~jameinel/bzr/2.0-full-version into lp:bzr/2.0

This changes 'bzr --version' to always print the full 3-tuple of major.minor.micro

So instead of getting "bzr v2.0" you get "bzr v2.0.0".

This seems to coincide with Martin's request about calling the release 2.0.0. (To clarify between things that need to land in 2.0.0 versus things that should just be landed in the 2.0.x stable release series.)

As such, I think it benefits the most to actually land it in 2.0.0 (-final) since once we get to 2.0.1 it won't make a difference since we will always show it.

Though it will effect trunk, since it will show 2.1.0beta1 rather than 2.1beta1. I could probably go either way, given that 'b1' can take the place of the micro, and we are unlikely to ever have 2.1.1beta1

Note that this probably requires some test suite changes. I'm mostly proposing this to get feedback on whether we *want* to do it, and if it is approved, I'll go ahead and do the test fixes.

+1 from me, including for 2.0.0, though I'll leave this open for a bit to let others comment.

> This changes 'bzr --version' to always print the full 3-tuple of
> major.minor.micro
>
> So instead of getting "bzr v2.0" you get "bzr v2.0.0".

Absolutely. If we expect a reasonable likelihood of a 2.0.1, we
should _definitely_ have a 2.0.0 instead of a 2.0. And having a 2.0.0
that calls itself 2.0 would just be nuts.

--
Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | <email address hidden>
Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/
           On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.