Re: Re: cvs: pear /Math_Numbers package.xml

Hi David: On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 12:32:33AM +0200, David Costa wrote: > > yes I am aware of that and is perfectly accurate. Both source codes > implement > the described functions. But the changes indicated didn't happen between 0.2.0 and 1.0.1 so the changelog is now misleading. > The only alternative was adding as note something like " > fixed version number" which doesn't look very attractive to me. If the shoe fits, wear it. Sorry you don't like the shoe's color. > If my version naming is wrong, I would appreciate if someone would > point out the other package leads (see some of the above mentioned > examples) > to change their Package.xml and of course roll another release. I feel the version numbering document which has been referenced in this thread already should be adhered to. Even if concensus hasn't been reached on that standard, it is the published standard. Don't worry about making yet another version number release because I imagine you'll be rolling a stable relase shortly, right? Thanks, --Dan -- T H E A N A L Y S I S A N D S O L U T I O N S C O M P A N Y data intensive web and database programming http://www.AnalysisAndSolutions.com/ 4015 7th Ave #4, Brooklyn NY 11232 v: 718-854-0335 f: 718-854-0409