Re: Simpler version naming
| From: | Greg Beaver | Date: | Fri, 18 Feb 2005 21:17:37 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Simpler version naming | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.pear.qa |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-qa+get-2466@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:59:46 -0500 cellog@php.net (Greg Beaver) wrote:Bar2 version 2.0.0a1 (alpha) [add in new features, fix bugs] Bar2 version 2.0.0RC1 (beta) [prepare for next stable release]Bar2 version 0.2.0 (alpha) [add in new features, fix bugs] Bar2 version 2.0.0RC1 (beta) [prepare for next stable release]This version numbering sounds even more confusing to me . As far as this is a new package, it's 1.0.0. Should I suggest to read the archives? When we discussed how to manage 2 major versions in the same setup? I did not make this up, this was already in there. Perhaps the best solution then, is to continue with the way that 1.x.0 works:
Greg, do you really think it's that important to mess more in the validation and versioning part of the PEAR implementation? I don't understand your question?
Stating that a package Foo2 is nothing else than a new package for Foo, keeping Foo in its name for "genealogy" reason could be comprehensible by nearly every lambda users.That is no problem in my opinion. I will post a revised version with this change after others have time to comment. Greg