Re: [CONCERN] Orgmode version string

From: Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>
To: Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [CONCERN] Orgmode version string
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:51:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0854CA9A-5755-4E7B-99E6-D2E911D55FF7@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <811v79f8s0.fsf@gmail.com>

On Oct 29, 2010, at 3:06 PM, Jambunathan K wrote:

>
> Carsten
>
>> Hi Jambunathan,
>>
>> On Oct 28, 2010, at 2:40 PM, Jambunathan K wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I have every reason to believe that upcoming version of Org would be
>>> tagged as 7.02. Earlier I had argued that version strings be
>>> version-to-list compatible. I would like to reiterate it.
>>>
>>> My real concern is that 7.02 would be deemed as equivalent to 7.2
>>> internally by the versioning subsystem and this is likely to clash
>>> with
>>> user's point of view. A user would *definitely* assume 7.02 as
>>> different
>>> from 7.2 and in all probability swear that former is inferior to the
>>> later.
>>
>> (version-to-list "7.02")  -> (7 2)
>> (version-to-list "7.20")  -> (7 20)
>>
>> so it seems to me that if we keep two-digit numbers, there will be no
>> problem at all.
>>
>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>> (version-list-= (version-to-list "7.02") (version-to-list "7.20"))
>> #+end_src
>>
>> - Carsten
>>
>
> Now that release-7.02 is out, I am a bit disappointed that a ELPA-tar
> named org-7.02.tar would be unusable.
>
> The reason is "7.02" doesn't round-trip well and package manager is
> allergic to such a choice. Verify this for yourself.
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
> (package-version-join (version-to-list "7.02"))
> #+end_src
>
> If you don't mind sharing, I am curious what made you still go with  
> 7.02
> scheme.

Well, most certainly not because I wanted to disappoint you.
On the contrary, I am really greateful for the ground work
you have laid to make us go with the packaging system.

So the reason must be that I have not read/digested the
numbering thread carefully enough.  What I remember from it
is:

- do not use something like 7.02a, because the letter will defeat
   version number testing
- from our most recent exchange I felt that you agree that
   7.02 will behave correctly when compared with the
   version- functions.  So I actually understood that
   you agreed with me.

The reason why I use 7.02 at all is just because I think it
is pretty when one is expecting 2-digit release numbers.
The release file numbers line up nicely in a directory listing.
Things like this.

Do you have the patience to summarize the arguments for me?
I will go with 7.3 for the next release if this is what is
really needed.

Greetings

- Carsten

>
> Jambunathan K.
>
>>>
>>> Please confirm what I am saying by evalling this:
>>>
>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>> (version-list-= (version-to-list "7.02") (version-to-list "7.2"))
>>> #+end_src
>>>
>>> Ignore this mail if it is already taken care of. Needless to say, I
>>> have
>>> ELPA-tarballs in mind when I say this.
>>>
>>> Jambunathan K.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
>>> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
>>> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
>>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode