Doru,

I guess because I don't agree that the following statement would be true:

  there will never be a regular version named 'stable'

I know that in git I can have a branch named 'stable' and a tag named 'stable' 
and that causes problems ... for me. 

Besides, the set of symbolic versions is not restricted to #stable and 
#development ... one could choose to define a symbolic version called #default 
or #'1.0'...

I intend for there to be two namespaces the linear version namespace and the 
symbolic version namespace to make a clear distinction between the two, because 
they have different semantics.

One shouldn't be surprised that when version #stable of project foo is loaded 
the current version of the project is '1.0' on one day and '1.1' on the next. 
Or when they load #'1.0' that the current version is '1.0-beta.19'.

This distinction is obviously not important to you and I am okay with that:)

Dale

----- Original Message -----
| From: "Tudor Girba" <[email protected]>
| To: [email protected]
| Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 10:50:37 AM
| Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Metacello Why symbolicversion and not simply     
tagged  version:?
| 
| The question is the same I asked when you introduced them :):
| Why are symbolic versions treated differently from normal ones?
| 
| This has two dimensions:
| - why have a different pragma at all?
| - why have the distinction between symbols and versions, given that
| there will never be a regular version named 'stable'?
| 
| Cheers,
| Doru
| 
| 
| On 21 Nov 2012, at 19:27, Dale Henrichs <[email protected]> wrote:
| 
| > Stef,
| > 
| > I'm not sure which context you are talking about ... the symbolic
| > version #stable can be used as an argument anywhere that the
| > linear version '1.1' can be used, so I think that it is true that
| > symbolic versions can be used in a #version: message ...
| > 
| > So I guess I need a little more context ...
| > 
| > Dale
| > 
| > ----- Original Message -----
| > | From: "Stéphane Ducasse" <[email protected]>
| > | To: "Pharo Development" <[email protected]>
| > | Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 2:19:02 PM
| > | Subject: [Pharo-project] Metacello Why symbolicversion and not
| > | simply tagged     version:?
| > | 
| > | Dale
| > | 
| > | in my goal to reduce the complexity of metacello, I'm wondering
| > | why
| > | symbolic versions could not be expressed as version:
| > | 
| > | because
| > | 
| > |   version: #stable
| > |   version: #development
| > | 
| > | are symbolic versions and there is no clash possible with
| > | 
| > |   version: '1.1'
| > | 
| > | Stef
| > | 
| > | 
| > 
| 
| --
| www.tudorgirba.com
| 
| "Things happen when they happen,
| not when you talk about them happening."
| 
| 
| 

Reply via email to