Yes. It would be very helpful to highlight a bit compatibility between versions. I keep that in mind for versionner.
Le 17 avr. 2013 à 11:10, Camillo Bruni a écrit : > > On 2013-04-17, at 02:50, "Sean P. DeNigris" <s...@clipperadams.com> wrote: > >> Camillo Bruni-3 wrote >>> I liked ruby-gems approach more than the one in Metacello. You usually >>> specify >>> a major version (as under linux) for your dependency. >> >> It seems they're using semantic versioning, which is *awesome*, but can we >> depend on the convention being followed? I've been pushing to get the tools >> (e.g. Versionner) to use semantic version numbers by default (i.e. new >> bugfix version, new enhancement version, new incompatible version) > > Yeah I think we can run all of that on top of versioner/conventions. > You can always introduce symbolic versions for releases as well so the old > habit of directly referring to a fixed version number will still continue to > work. >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
