On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Adam Kennedy <adamkennedybac...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2009/4/21 David Golden <da...@hyperbolic.net>: >> Any version that does not appear in the form of type (a) or type (b) >> is considered invalid. The behavior of modules encountering invalid >> versions is undefined. > > Well that's not particularly helpful.
I don't want to define heuristics in the recommendation. > Also, why exclude v1.23 useful as a tuple...? Belt and suspenders. It might be mistaken for a number. Written as "v1.23.0" it's more obvious that it's a version tuple. And if someone leaves off or strips the "v" for some reason, it's still clearly a tuple and a liberal parser can deal with it without heuristics. -- David
