John Beckett wrote:
> It is convenient to say that Vim version 8.2.x is needed for a particular > feature, but someone not familiar with Vim conventions may not know what > the "x" means. I propose that, if "Included patches" is a range such as > "1-3273", :version should show: > > VIM - Vi IMproved 8.2.3273 (...) > ... > Included patches: 1-3273 > > instead of: > > VIM - Vi IMproved 8.2 (...) > ... > Included patches: 1-3273 > > If included patches is not a contiguous range, just show 8.2 as is done > currently. Since the date that follows is for 8.2, it might be a bit confusing. I don't think many people would have trouble understanding that the third number is the patch level. I mean, in a time were people refer to changes by their commit hash... -- Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at three o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of hot gravel, go to work at the mill every day for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would beat us around the head and neck with a broken bottle, if we were LUCKY! /// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ /// \\\ \\\ sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ /// \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/202108021607.172G7rWh545999%40masaka.moolenaar.net.
