[squeak-dev] Re: 1.0 not a valid VersionNumber?

Stephen Pair stephen at pairhome.net
Wed Apr 9 17:43:18 UTC 2008


On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Stephen Pair <stephen at pairhome.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Brett Kosinski <fancypantalons at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > That's just a design decision I made.  I felt was would be confusing
> > to have
> > > version numbers "1" and "1.0" in the same lineage.  When you create a
> > > branch, you would make "1.1" based on "1".
> >
> > Fundamentally, what this illustrates is that these version numbers are
> > imminently suitable for internal versioning of a product during
> > development, and are more or less akin to, say, SVN revision numbers
> > or the like (obviously with more semantics built in), but are wholly
> > unsuitable (and were probably never meant to be used) for
> > customer-facing version numbers that would be used for marking public
> > releases.
> >
> > Brett.
>
>
> Correct.
>

I should have added, VersionHistory also let's you do a fair bit of
reasoning and manipulation of and entire tree of VersionNumbers (including
operations affecting an entire branch of version numbers).

- Stephen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20080409/36c8123b/attachment.htm


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list