| 1 |
Brian Harring wrote: |
| 2 |
> Response to this is that "well don't have versions like that", |
| 3 |
> which while valid, is ignoring the point- cpvs are exact in their |
| 4 |
> version specification, there isn't anything implicit about them. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
This sounds to me like 'division through zero doesn't make sense, but |
| 7 |
i've still got the right to do it'. Really, if anybody is ever going to |
| 8 |
release 1.0 and 1.0.0 along each other, that person is completely on |
| 9 |
crack. You can't do 2/0, either can you have 1.0 and 1.0.0 being |
| 10 |
different versions. They should be the same. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
That being said, which one is higher? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> Tag on a (.0)* implicitly, you open up potential issues like above. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Nonissue, really. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Kind Regards, |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Simon Stelling |
| 22 |
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer |
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives