On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
At 05:14 PM 1/25/2006 -0800, Heikki Toivonen wrote:
So, to be clear, do you want:
1) Fully descriptive version numbers or
2) Hybrid where version describes milestone and auxiliary info specifies
dev version?
If we want the version number to convey all of the information it is
going to be a little more complicated than doing it without.
Oh, there is also the question of do we want the version number to
contain an svn revision number or not. Opinions?
I think we will want the svn revision included for anything that is not an
officially numbered release. For official releases, it's likely to be
redundant, since there will be a release branch.
Agreed
Should the version number contain a timestamp?
-1; setuptools only includes the timestamp feature for people who are stuck
with CVS or some such. :)
Agreed
Something I am not sure if Python eggs and pje's version parser deals
with is the 'm1', ..., 'mn' syntax that has been proposed. I.e., does
it compare 0.7, 0.7.1 and 0.7.m1 correctly etc. (0.7.m1 < 0.7 < 0.7.1)?
You would need an 'a' or 'dev' or some such in there for that to work;
0.7a-m1 or 0.7dev-m1 would be less than 0.7. 0.7m1 would be assumed to be a
postrelease patch of 0.7.
How about 0.7m-1 ?
Andi..
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
