Standardize usage of versioning in info response.

[madolson]

The ldap module reports 16777471 as its version. There is nothing strictly wrong with this version

module:name=ldap,ver=16777471,api=1,filters=0,usedby=[],using=[],options=[]

All the other Valkey modules report as a base10, two digits for each of major, minor and patch. For example. 1.0.1 is 10001

module:name=bf,ver=10000,api=1,filters=0,usedby=[],using=[],options=[]
module:name=search,ver=10000,api=1,filters=0,usedby=[],using=[],options=[handle-io-errors|handle-repl-async-load|no-implicit-signal-modified]
module:name=json,ver=10010,api=1,filters=0,usedby=[],using=[],options=[handle-io-errors]

[rjd15372]

The rationale behind the LDAP versioning is explained in the header comment of src/version.rs:

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Module Version
//
// The module version format follows the semantic versioning system.
//
// To encode the version string in a 32-bit integer value, we use the
// first byte to denote the development version phase, and the remaining
// 3 bytes encode the `MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH` values.
//
// 32          24          16          8           0
// |-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|
// |   MAJOR   |   MINOR   |   PATCH   |  DEV, RC  |
//
// For development releases the value `1` denotes that the current version
// is being developed.
//
// Upon the release of the first release candidate version, the value is
// incremented by `1`, and continues to be incremented whenever a new
// release candidate is released.
//
// The GA release is denoted by the value `0xFF` in the first byte.
//
// Examples:
//   Version 0x01000001 should be represented by the string "1.0.0-dev"
//   Version 0x01000002 should be represented by the string "1.0.0-rc1"
//   Version 0x010003FF should be represented by the string "1.0.3"

This allows to have a strict ascending order between versions, even for RC and Dev versions.

But I understand that the base 10 integer value of the version is not human-friendly. I can fix it by shifting 1 byte to the right just to make it more human-friendly, but will loose the information about whether is a dev, RC, or GA release.

Maybe we could also expose a human-friendly version string in the info command.

[madolson]

My concern is more along the lines of having all the modules follow a different convention. I don't know if I feel all that strongly about which one we should be using.