From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [CONCERN] Orgmode version string
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 21:57:37 +0530
Message-ID: <81pquui8p2.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <8162wmze0s.fsf@gmail.com> <8762wm5s3j.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51637 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PBVOQ-0007jO-MN
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 12:32:00 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kjambunathan@gmail.com>) id 1PBVKQ-0002U0-2s
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 12:27:51 -0400
Received: from mail-gx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.161.169]:62679)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kjambunathan@gmail.com>) id 1PBVKQ-0002Tt-0F
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 12:27:50 -0400
Received: by gxk3 with SMTP id 3so1168399gxk.0
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 09:27:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8762wm5s3j.fsf@gnu.org> (Bastien's message of "Thu, 28 Oct 2010
	16:06:56 +0200")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Bastien <bastien.guerry@wikimedia.fr>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org


Hello Bastien

Bastien <bastien.guerry@wikimedia.fr> writes:

> Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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
>
> I confirm.
>
>> Ignore this mail if it is already taken care of. Needless to say, I have
>> ELPA-tarballs in mind when I say this.
>
> Another way is to make Emacs more liberal about version names.
>
> Can you suggest a new default for `version-regexp-alist' so that
> 7.01 is considered older than 7.10?

I don't think I can sell this to emacs-devel with any success. It's not
really worth it.

I think I have made a sensible argument (or atleast recorded my
opinion).  I will leave things at that.

>
> (version-list-= (version-to-list "7.02") (version-to-list "7.2"))
> being t is not intuitive.

Jambunathan K.