Re: Why are versions restricted to 999?

David Golden said:
> Perl itself, for one.  I refer you to
> http://www.dagolden.com/index.php/204/perl-version-number-puzzles/ for
> your horror and amusement.

Those are interesting, but I'm not entirely sure how they practically relate.
 A module requiring version vX.Y.Z isn't likely to generate "use Foo vX.Y.Z"
code!  I can't even reproduce most of them.  I suspect they're related to
broken versions of version.pm (which questions, again, the wisdom of pinning
the spec to version.pm).


> The Perl community has so horribly screwed up module version numbering
> that the spec just attempts to encourage a minimum level of
> consistency.  It can't solve all the problems.

If this is all about supporting out of date Perls and toolchains, can we
downgrade it to a recommendation/should rather than a must?  It seems silly to
declare a meta file invalid just to support some dying edge cases.


On 2010.4.20 2:49 AM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
>>>> I was worried that was it.  That conversion should be considered,
>>>> but not enshrined in the spec as a limit.
> 
> "999 revisions ought to be enough to anyone"

♪ I got 999 revisions but I can't add one ♪

I speak from experience, limiting the version is a bad idea.

http://markmail.org/message/ra4wobbbyk5nx36a

http://groups.google.com/group/perl.perl5.porters/browse_thread/thread/722c95dc76480dd1/bea6e5897fcbd584?q=#bea6e5897fcbd584


-- 
40. I do not have super-powers.
    -- The 213 Things Skippy Is No Longer Allowed To Do In The U.S. Army
           http://skippyslist.com/list/