On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 05:07:01PM +0100, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Floris Bruynooghe
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > This is an important point.  I tought the aim of PEP 386 was to create
> > a version scheme that can represent every version number developers
> > want to express, not to create one that allows everyones favourite
> > syntax.
> >
> 
> Absolutely,

Maybe worth explaining this in the abstract of the motivation of the
PEP to focus discussion?  Otherwise I reckon chances are pretty high
that the syntax flameware will flare up again when this gets proposed
on python-dev (or here if there's need for another round).


> So If the current proposal works for all cases (e.g. people can
> translate their schemes
> into PEP 386 one), I am proposing to:
[...]

+1, I think that's a good approach
(+0 on the aliases part though)


Floris

-- 
Debian GNU/Linux -- The Power of Freedom
www.debian.org | www.gnu.org | www.kernel.org
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  [email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Reply via email to