On Aug 4, 2010, at 3:12 PM, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:13 PM, David Golden <xda...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Kartik Thakore <thakore.kar...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Is it possible to have >>> >>> 2.2.1beta1 VERSION, for a perl module? >> >> It's not advisable. >> >> C.f. http://www.dagolden.com/index.php/369/version-numbers-should-be-boring/ > > Hum. This is for an application (a game), not a module, and I want it > to be clearly labelled as a beta release. So fine with "There are no > standard conventions for alphanumerics, and you just make life hard > for the machines, which means no help for the humans." but I don't see > the big problem for machines and I don't know how to say "hey this is > beta" only with numbers; especially if "5.005_03 is equivalent to > 5.5.30", I don't see how this could be considered to mark it beta/dev > :/ >
"5.005_03" is a string not a number.
