Re: unified versioning RFC (attempt 2)

Hi Folks: On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 01:26:45AM -0500, Greg Beaver wrote: > > Perhaps you and Alan could work this out? What needs to be worked out? We already have a system: http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=65 The questions raised in the "[PEAR-QA] XML_Tree - Lets Fix this up finally" thread are already completely covered by the existing convention. The questions raised regarding what to name the proposed PEAR 1.4.0 stuff are also (vaguely) answered as well: "RCx". I agree, "ax" and "bx" are better for this situation. So, if the "ax" and "bx" are technically feasable for the purposes of package validation and version_compare(), the issue before us is: do we just allow an exception to the RFC for the PEAR package or do we ammend the RFC to include this "ax" "bx" stuff? The exception is the easy way to go, and considering PEAR is likely the only package that needs to do this, we could be fine. If we see broader needs for "ax" etc, then let's ammend the RFC. 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