On 9/12/10 Sep 12 -2:57 PM, Faré wrote: >>> ASDF(76): (mapcar #'parse-integer >>> (split-string "2.103" :separator ".")) >>> (2 103) >> >> And that is what's annoying, since actually (semantically) 103 is meant as >> 1.3, no? >> > Yup, and it's all my fault for failing to switch numbering during the > 2.0 release. > Hopefully, 3.0 will fix that.
Sorry. I thought the implication was that there was some bug in the revision number handling, but I see that's not what was meant. Honestly, I don't know if we have three significant fields worth of version information, anyway. We have 2 versus nothing or, perhaps soon 3, indicating different APIs. Inside 2 we just have individual release numbers (patch levels). This closes the door to having an ASDF 2.1 (2.2?), but does anyone really care that much? The next version can just be 3 and then 4.... _______________________________________________ asdf-devel mailing list asdf-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
