Peter Dalgaard <p.dalgaard <at> biostat.ku.dk> writes: : : Gabor Grothendieck <ggrothendieck <at> myway.com> writes: : : > : > rw2010a - alpha, i.e. development version (previously rw2010dev) : > : > rw2010b - beta version (previously rw2001beta) : > : > rw2010f - final version (previously rw2010) : > : > rw2010p - patched version (previously rw2010pat) : > : : > : That would work. Use the rename command, and you've got it. : > : : > : > Renaming is not really workable if you are giving your scripts to others. : > They won't want build scripts that rename their folders. : ...... : > Its really desirable to keep Windows batch scripts as simple as : > possible and such a transformation is trickier than you might : > think in the Windows batch language. : > : > I was hoping that the R team would consider a simplifying : > change to make it easier to create build scripts. The least such : > change that I can think of is to use alpha as a suffix in place of dev : > and to use final to suffix unsuffixed versions. That would be enough to : > allow them to sort in ascending order. : > : > This involves no coding at all for the R team. Just a decision : > to regularize the naming. : : In a word, no, we won't do that. I'd certainly veto it if it came to : that. : : It is a bad idea to have scripts depending on sort order (and R core : has learned the hard way that sort order depends on locale), and it is : an even worse idea to modify development concepts to fit a specificic : alphabetical order. Case in point: A development version is _not_ the : same as an alpha version!
I am pretty sure one could come up with a naming scheme that would work in every locale. If we used a, b, f and p then I doubt there are any locales in which those are not increasing. If that's not true we could use numbers. I really doubt that there are locales in which digits are mot increasing. : ______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
