develooper Front page | perl.cpan.testers.discuss | Postings from June 2011

2- or 3-part version numbers?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
John A. Kunze
Date:
June 28, 2011 11:01
Subject:
2- or 3-part version numbers?
Message ID:
alpine.DEB.2.00.1106281051080.12711@jak-desktop
Do folks have thoughts on whether it's better for CPAN modules to use
2- or 3-part version numbers?

I switched recently to using "vI.J.K" version numbering with my modules
because [1] and [2] seem to encourage it as a kind of best practice.

But isn't that counter to [3], which recommends just "I.J" or "I.J_K"?

This confusion came up for me recently when one WinXP smoker failed to
recognize the 3-part version numbering in one of my module prequisites.

-John

[1] http://www.cpan.org/misc/cpan-faq.html#What_versions_mean
[2] http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=102368
[3] http://search.cpan.org/~jesse/perl-5.14.1/pod/perlmodstyle.pod#Version_numbering
[4] http://search.cpan.org/~andya/Perl-Version-1.011/lib/Perl/Version.pm
Thread Previous | Thread Next

nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About