2009/11/19 Sean Coates <[email protected]>: > On Jun 28, 6:44 pm, "Michael C. Harris" wrote: >> Currently there should be a 0.6-(\d+).(\d+) tag for all plugins. > > This should read "for all plugins that have a 0.6-compatible version", > I think.
That was an aspirational "should", as in "we should all get busy making tags for 0.6". 2009/11/19 luke <[email protected]>: > My view is that the current svn structure works well (http:// > pastebin.com/m7a0f75b2 for further description). I think we're settled on the current svn structure (I don't think Sean was suggesting we change that). The issue is, if Mr Punter downloads a version of a plugin from trunk, and it's version 0.7-0.2, more development happens, then version 0.7-0.2 is tagged, we have no way of knowing what version they're using from inside the plugin. > I like the idea of <version stable='false'>0.6</version>. In my mind, > the stability of it is a property of the (to be released) version. I don't mind that either. At least that can tell us the plugin is between rXXX and rYYY. Of course, people will forget to remove the attribute when they tag ... > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/habari-dev Having plugins with version numbers like 0.7-0.x, if that's what is being suggested, sounds like a bad idea to me. If there are 3 releases of a plugin for 0.7, a particular download from trunk could be from anywhere in those releases. -- Michael C. Harris, School of CS&IT, RMIT University http://twofishcreative.com/michael/blog IRC: michaeltwofish #habari -- To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/habari-dev
