>>I might be acting foolish here but why not do the new version formating as >>5.004r2.0, 5.610r1.0 etc? >I am not sure what you are asking. I cannot understand what those versions >are supposed to represent. Perl 5.004 Macperl 2.0, Perl 5.61 Macperl 1.0 I'm not overly fond of the current 5.6.1 etc versioning, preferring the more simply numeric 5.610 etc, and since perl-perl uses 5.004 etc . . . Maybe that's just me ;) -- ~nikc [ http://www.phreelance.net/ ] [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [EMAIL PROTECTED] is deprecated
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl KIMURA Takeshi
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Scott R. Godin
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Chris Nandor
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Morbus Iff
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Chris Nandor
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Terje Bless
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Chris Nandor
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Chris Nandor
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl John Delacour
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Paul Hoffman
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Nicholas G. Thornton
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Chris Nandor
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl robinmcf
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Chris Nandor
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Bart Lateur
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Paul Schinder
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl Chris Nandor
- Re: [MacPerl] The State of MacPerl tedd
- [MacPerl] Text File Creator ...was: The ... John Delacour