Re: Simpler version naming

Alan Knowles wrote:

I'm still trying to decipher what you are attempting to do. the honouring of installing alpha/beta is set by the prefered_state stuff, doing testing on version names should have nothing to do with this. - it will make your code a nightmare and will produce unpredictable behaviour in the long run.

1.3.0 (stable) [major release] 1.3.1 (stable) 1.3.2 (stable) 1.3.3 (stable) 1.3.3.1 (oops) 1.3.4 (stable) 1.3.5 (stable) 1.3.6 (alpha) [this is 1.4.0a1]

<-- no this should be 1.4.0 (alpha)?

1.3.7 (alpha) [1.4.0a2]

<-- no this should be 1.4.1 (alpha)?

1.3.8 (stable) [this is the 1.3.x branch!!]

Are assuming that x.x.0 is always the final stable release?.. (this No, the first stable release.

rarely is true in reality, and is worth using as a basis for numbering.) eg.. I dont trust kernels on mission critical boxes until the are x.x.12+ I dont trust php release on mission critical boxes until the are x.x.4+

If x.x.4 is the first stable release, you have to wait until x.x.8+. However, your solution does solve the problem I was speaking of, and I can live with it. Greg