[Zope3-dev] Re: A thought on backward compatibility and minimum versions

[Tres Seaver]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim Fulton wrote:
> On May 31, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
>> I'd rather have the dot, e.g. "foo 2.* >= 2.5", just for clarity:
>>
>>   - It makes the intent clearer (that you want any version in the
>>     "two dot" release line).
>>
>>   - It disambiguates the case where the version number might have
>>     double digits (e.g, '0.1' vs. '0.10').
> 
> This depends on how the * is interpreted.  setuptools already treats  
> dots as optional in many cases and this would be one more.  I also  
> prefer the last syntax I suggested without the "*". So, the example  
> would become:
> 
>    "foo 2, >=2.5"

That seems like an empty set to me.

> (I forgot commas in my earlier examples.)
> 
> Without the *, I think there is less of tendency to interpret the  
> specification as a glob.
> 
> 
>> Another feature I'm not sure is already in setuptools:
>>
>>   - I *don't* want dev releases to replace production ones
>>     implicitly:  no package should be able to install a non-released
>>     version without explicit callout.  If this isn't already the
>>     default behavior, then I'd like syntax for spelling it.
> 
> What do you mean by a "dev" release?

Any release tagged as "alpha", "beta", "rc", "pre", or with an SVN revision.

- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tseaver at palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGXuZs+gerLs4ltQ4RAgrgAKCkXrIkwHzegujOnobtd9T3TzwO0ACfWXNY
NZLXDYZDyk7ADYy/2kKllUE=
=W5nx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----