Re: [Biopython] Switching to PEP440 compliant versioning for our development code

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 7:59 PM, Eric Talevich <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> I agree with this change. But in my experience, the suffix that plays best
> with Python versioning- and packaging-related tools, and follows PEP440 most
> literally, would be "<next_version>.dev0".
>
> -Eric

Yes, by my reading of PEP440 etc, 1.68.dev would be normalised
to 1.68.dev0 for comparison - but personally that looks silly and
will just lead people to ask what the trailing zero means.

On a related note, we could try to do something clever like
1.68.devN where N is the number of commits as in
https://github.com/astropy/astropy/blob/master/setup.py
but that seems overly complicated.

Perhaps 1.68.devYYYYMMDD would be a better idea if we
really cared about telling apart intermediate development
releases (important the trailing number strictly increases),
but thus far it hasn't been a problem.

Peter