On 6/15/07, Bill Dortch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For example, here is how I now must check for version 1.0.0RC3 or later:if (defined?JRUBY_VERSION) && ((JRUBY_VERSION =~ /^(\d+\.\d+\.\d+)([-\.A-Z0-9]*)/ && (($1 == '1.0.0' && ($2.empty? || $2 >= 'RC3')) || $1 > ' 1.0.0')) || (JRUBY_VERSION =~ /^(\d+\.\d+)([-\.A-Z0-9]*)/ && $1 >= '1.1')) Maybe I'll just replace this with an array of known versions, and publish a new gem for each new JRuby version... On 6/14/07, Bill Dortch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is it intended that JRuby depart from RationalVersioningPolicy ("three non-negative integers, separated by periods (e.g. 3.1.4)")? It wasn't exactly adhered to for the release candidates, and is currently set to 1.1. What should an application look for to determine/compare versions?
I think the RCs were sort of an anomaly, but that said they did get some wide distribution. One would hope that people would upgrade to 1.0 once it got out. I set the version to 1.1 in trunk just because I didn't know what the next major version would be (1.5? 2.0?) and some people were complaining that trunk still built as 1.0RC3. Isn't it fairly common to drop the trailing .0 in a 3-number version? /Nick --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
