On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Hugh Sasse <h...@dmu.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 1 May 2009, Chad Woolley wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Eric Hodel <drbr...@segment7.net> wrote:
>> > I've cleaned out most of the easy stuff in the bug and patch queue again,
>> > should we release a 1.3.3?
>>
>> http://www.extremeprogramming.org/rules/releaseoften.html
>
> :-) Pretty sure what that's about, but I have only one caution:
>
> How do we check for version numbers? If we assume /\d\.\d\.\d/ as
> Ruby has in the past we will run out. If we assume /\d+\.\d+\.\d+/ then
> roll on Rubygems 12.230.965 and so on. :-) Redcloth just ran into this
> I think.
>
irb(main):004:0> v1 = Gem::Version.new('12.230.965')
=> #<Gem::Version "12.230.965">
irb(main):005:0> v2 = Gem::Version.new('12.230.875')
=> #<Gem::Version "12.230.875">
irb(main):006:0> v1 > v2
=> true
irb(main):007:0> v1 < v2
=> false
--
Luis Lavena
AREA 17
-
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
_______________________________________________
Rubygems-developers mailing list
http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems
Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
