Well, I'm kinda shifting from "opposed" to "open to it." The more I think about it, the more I can see that Archie's use case isn't a case of Ivy being overly helpful.
But Archie, can you or anyone else articulate in your own words the rules of latest-compatible? The current brief description in the documentation can be interpreted to mean anything. I would find it troubling if the maintainers of an open-source framework are moving to a different default behavior, and no one can put in plain English what that default behavior does. On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Archie Cobbs <arc...@dellroad.org> wrote: > > The assumption that any revision greater than 1.0 will automatically be > backward compatible with 1.0 is in my opinion just plain crazy and wrong. > Software changes all the time and things are constantly being broken by > incompatible changes. Most projects in fact have an explicit policy to this > effect, saying for example that any change in the major version number > signifies an incompatible change in the API, etc. > > Moreover, this becomes more and more true as a project's dependency tree > gets bigger and more complicated -- exactly the situations where you need > ivy the most. > > Finally, if what you want to say is "anything revision 1.0 or later" then > we > have the syntax rev="[1.0,)" for that purpose. Having rev="1.0" mean the > same thing is totally counter-intuitive. > >
