[Bioperl-l] Bioperl versioning
cjfields at uiuc.edu
Tue Oct 24 12:45:25 EDT 2006
> 'handle'? I think it shows up as '6.2.13' simply because it was uploaded
> with the filename Perl6-Pugs-6.2.13.tar.gz
Sorry, my point was that when Audrey T. uses '6.2.13', her $VERSION is
'6.002013'. So maybe we should follow a similar convention. Seems easier
and less confusing to me, at least.
> As you point out, the code has the kind of $VERSION number we've been
> suggesting in this thread:
> > From the Perl6::Pugs source, $VERSION for rel 6.2.13 is '6.002013':
> > our $VERSION = 6.002013;
> > That's also a very perlish-way to do it. And there are no developer
> > versions of Pugs, since it is always under active development. We could
> > something like:
> > our $VERSION = 1.005002_01;
> Yes, this was already like one of my suggestions (1.0502_01), but I
> brought up the concern that 1.05 might be < 1.4.
> So then we have a question: do we try and fumble a 1.4 compatible number
> by using 1.60_10, or do we have a clean break, remove 1.4 from CPAN if
> it causes problems, and go for the 'proper' 1.006000 (1.6.0) with no
> room for RC numbering, or 1.006000010 (18.104.22.168) - the first final
> release following some 1.006000_001 (1.6.0.01 == rc1) RCs?
I would go for the clean break if it follows perl/CPAN convention.
'1.60_10' looks like '1.60.10', not 1.6 or 1.6 RC1, so it's too confusing.
If we can use '1.00600x' for 1.6, 1.6.1, etc, and '1.006000_00x' for 1.6
RC1, 1.6 RC2 etc then that would be consistent and perl-compatible.
BTW, the reason I looked at Pugs was to see what some of the Perl6
developers were using. Who knows; they'll probably change it!
> I don't think it would be a hassle; on the contrary it would be very
> useful to know the CPAN distribution actually works. I'm very happy with
> the idea that a release candidate gets fully tested...
So you obviously feel strongly about it! ;>
I don't have a problem as long as we stick with doing this from now on (i.e.
have a consistent versioning scheme, release policy, CPAN release policy,
etc). Would be nice for Jason/Brian/Hilmar to chime in as to the reasoning
behind the older versioning scheme.
Postdoctoral Researcher - Switzer Lab
Dept. of Biochemistry
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
More information about the Bioperl-l