On 17 Nov 2021, at 13:31, Robert Dodier wrote:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 10:45 AM Robert Goldman <rpgold...@sift.info>
wrote:
I favor something like this because it would be nice to have
prerelease versions of ASDF that perform version checks properly.
What I mean is, if we are going to add a feature in version 3.4,
right now that would be in a prerelease version with a version number
of something like 3.3.5.22
It would be a lot better for realistic testing if we could instead
use 3.4.0-alpha1 or 3.4.0-1 and have ASDF know that 3.4.0-1 comes
before 3.4.0, not after.
Hi Robert, hi everyone. I haven't been following closely, but while
you are working out details, let me just mention that I recommend
against version numbers that require special interpretation to
discover their ordering, e.g. 3.4.0-1 < 3.4.0.
Mostly I'm just thinking that somebody's not going to get the memo
(it's usually me).
For what it's worth, and all the best.
I guess that would be an argument for using something more obvious than
`-`, like the string `alpha` so `3.4.0-alpha1` or `3.4.0alpha1` instead
of `3.4.0-1` since there the meaning should be relatively obvious.
My feeling is that if a user misinterprets `3.4.0-1`, then shame on me.
But if a user misinterprets `3.4.0alpha1` then shame on them.
I'm not sure how that would align with semver...
