Re: [sugar] [OLPC library] Physics -- Newtonian mechanics.. for kids!
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:44 PM, Eben Eliason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's true, however I think it's also been agreed that we need support for, at a minimum, major and minor version numbers for activities. We should probably make some final decisions on that and make sure that any software that depends on integers is prepared to consider anything of version X without a minor version specified to be X.0 for forward compatibility. Ping -- where can I find more information on activity numbering? I chose 0.1-1.0-x.x style numbering because it reflects 1.0 being when I believe the activity is ready for deployment. I hope this intended meaning is preserved in any suggested version numbering standards. Things that might be nice to also include on any activity numbering scheme: - 1.0 is special - when to hold the release party - testedness / ready-for-classroom? - major / minor changes Brian - Eben On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please remember that activity version numbers must be integers. Software does exist which relies on this assumption! Thanks, Michael ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] [OLPC library] Physics -- Newtonian mechanics.. for kids!
That's true, however I think it's also been agreed that... Could you please cite the discussion leading up to the agreement you're referring to? Thanks, Michael ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] [OLPC library] Physics -- Newtonian mechanics.. for kids!
Please remember that activity version numbers must be integers. Software does exist which relies on this assumption! Thanks, Michael ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] [OLPC library] Physics -- Newtonian mechanics.. for kids!
That's true, however I think it's also been agreed that we need support for, at a minimum, major and minor version numbers for activities. We should probably make some final decisions on that and make sure that any software that depends on integers is prepared to consider anything of version X without a minor version specified to be X.0 for forward compatibility. - Eben On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please remember that activity version numbers must be integers. Software does exist which relies on this assumption! Thanks, Michael ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
