Jim Fulton wrote:
It's actually worse than that. <2.0 would admit 2.0a1. :) You'd
probably need something like < 1.99.
I can deal with spelling dependencies on major version X as <= X.999.
Even if developers remembered, it would be icky to have to spell out
something like >=3.4 <=3.99 on everwhere.
Not as icky (IMHO) as having distribution names with embedded major
version numbers. I'm interested in other people's opinions here.
Maybe there is some kind of dependency syntax that reads well that
means "I want this major version". Can you think of a syntax that is
actually nicer than foo2?
I can think of a syntax, but don't know if setuptools supports it.
Perhaps I should look that up. But I wont.
Senior Software Engineer
Zope3-dev mailing list