Re: Meta v2 missing information on how to compare versions

On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 15:38 +0300, "Michael G Schwern" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> ...
> Notes about alpha versions
> --------------------------
> DEFINITION:
> 1) Strip off the alpha version
> 2) If they are equal, the alpha version is the lesser.
> 2b) If they are both alphas, compare the alpha numbers as integers
> 3) If they are not, compare normally.
> 
> EXAMPLE:
>      1.00_01   < 1.00
>      v1.0.0_01 < v1
>      1.00_00   < 1.00
>      1.01_01   > 1.00
>      1.00_01   = 1.00_01
>      1.00_02   > 1.00_01
> 
> RECOMMENDATION: To avoid confusion, increment your version number between
> an 
> alpha release and stable.  That is, 1.2.3_1 should be followed by 1.2.4.
> 
> NOTE:  This doesn't appear to jive with version.pm.  Here's what it does:
> 1.0100 < 1.0101_01
> 1.0101 > 1.0101_00
> 1.0101 < 1.0101_01
> 
> IMO X.Y_Z should always be < than X.Y.  That is, 1.01 > 1.01_05.  This
> reads 
> 1.01_05 as "the 5th alpha release of 1.01" just like Firefox 3.6.4 beta 1
> will 
> eventually be followed by Firefox 3.6.4.

I'm sorry, but this section is just *wrong*, IMO. X.Y_Z  should always
be > X.Y. Otherwise, you've just broken (at least the release sequence
of) previous versions of the toolchain that make the assumption that a
simple s/_// gets something to compare to that works, without
version.pm. (Module::Build, for example, went 0.3603 to 0.36_04 to
0.3605 just within the past few months. I also remember perl doing
5.005_51 versions in the past during the runup to 5.6.0, as being later
than 5.00504. )

The way you're doing it, you have to increment between a release and an
alpha, as well as between an alpha and a release, or else you ruin
numerical sequence for stuff that just does the underscore removal.

You don't get 1.01_05 as "the 5th alpha release of 1.01", if, once
you're exiting the alpha sequence, you immediately increment to 1.02,
anyway.

When X.Y_Z > X.Y, this can be done:
(ascii art - may not look good with proportional fonts - Just realize
that 1.103_101 is branched off of 1.103)

1.102 ---> 1.102001 --> 1.102002 ('maint')
 \
  \---> 1.102_101 ... --> 1.102_103 --> 1.103 ('blead') ---> 1.103001
  ('new maint')
                                         \
                                          \---> 1.103_101 ('new blead')

(this is the way I'm doing Perl::Dist::WiX's numbering. It appears that
CPAN.pm also is doing something similar to this, only with 2 digit
segments instead of 3)

In this case, anything beginning with 1.102 is based off of the 1.102
"trunk" and it's branches, until the dev version turns into 1.103.

--Curtis Jewell
--
Curtis Jewell
[email protected]           http://csjewell.dreamwidth.org/
[email protected]   http://csjewell.comyr.org/perl/

"Your random numbers are not that random" -- perl-5.10.1.tar.gz/util.c

Strawberry Perl for Windows betas: http://strawberryperl.com/beta/